What do you think?
Rate this book
Very Short Introductions #016
History: A Very Short Introduction
There are many stories we can tell about the past, and we are not, perhaps, as free as we might imagine in our choice of which stories to tell, or where those stories end. John Arnold's addition to Oxford's popular Very Short Introductions series is a stimulating essay about how people study and understand history. The book begins by inviting us to think about various questions provoked by our investigation of history, and then explores the ways in which these questions have been answered in the past. Such key concepts as causation, interpretation, and periodization are introduced by way of concrete examples of how historians work, thus giving the reader a sense of the excitement implicit in discovering the past--and ourselves.
The aim throughout A Very Short Introduction is to discuss theories of history in a general, pithy, and accessible manner, rather than delve into specific periods. This is a book that will appeal to all students and general readers with an interest in history or historiography.
About the
Oxford's Very Short Introductions series offers concise and original introductions to a wide range of subjects--from Islam to Sociology, Politics to Classics, Literary Theory to History, and Archaeology to the Bible. Not simply a textbook of definitions, each volume in this series provides trenchant and provocative--yet always balanced and complete--discussions of the central issues in a given discipline or field. Every Very Short Introduction gives a readable evolution of the subject in question, demonstrating how the subject has developed and how it has influenced society. Eventually, the series will encompass every major academic discipline, offering all students an accessible and abundant reference library. Whatever the area of study that one deems important or appealing, whatever the topic that fascinates the general reader, the Very Short Introductions series has a handy and affordable guide that will likely prove indispensable.
The aim throughout A Very Short Introduction is to discuss theories of history in a general, pithy, and accessible manner, rather than delve into specific periods. This is a book that will appeal to all students and general readers with an interest in history or historiography.
About the
Oxford's Very Short Introductions series offers concise and original introductions to a wide range of subjects--from Islam to Sociology, Politics to Classics, Literary Theory to History, and Archaeology to the Bible. Not simply a textbook of definitions, each volume in this series provides trenchant and provocative--yet always balanced and complete--discussions of the central issues in a given discipline or field. Every Very Short Introduction gives a readable evolution of the subject in question, demonstrating how the subject has developed and how it has influenced society. Eventually, the series will encompass every major academic discipline, offering all students an accessible and abundant reference library. Whatever the area of study that one deems important or appealing, whatever the topic that fascinates the general reader, the Very Short Introductions series has a handy and affordable guide that will likely prove indispensable.
137 pages, Paperback
First published January 1, 2000
196 people are currently reading
3118 people want to read
About the author
John H. Arnold
23 books15 followersJohn Hugh Arnold (born 1969) is a British historian. Since 2016, he has been the Professor of Medieval History at the University of Cambridge. He previously worked at Birkbeck College, University of London, where he specialised in the study of medieval religious culture. He has also written widely on historiography and why history matters.
Born 28 November 1969, Arnold received his Bachelor of Arts degree in history and his Doctor of Philosophy degree in medieval studies from the University of York. He was professor of medieval history at Birkbeck College, University of London, from 2008. He joined the college as a lecturer in 2001. Before that he was a lecturer at the University of East Anglia. He is a member of the Social History Society and the Medieval Academy of America.
Arnold specialises in the study of medieval religious culture, saying that while he has never been a believer in any religion, "belief" has always fascinated him. In his work he asks "Why do people believe the things they believe? What does 'believing' really mean in practice?" Arnold has also written widely about historiography. In 2008 he wrote a policy paper, Why history matters - and why medieval history also matters, for History & Policy.
Born 28 November 1969, Arnold received his Bachelor of Arts degree in history and his Doctor of Philosophy degree in medieval studies from the University of York. He was professor of medieval history at Birkbeck College, University of London, from 2008. He joined the college as a lecturer in 2001. Before that he was a lecturer at the University of East Anglia. He is a member of the Social History Society and the Medieval Academy of America.
Arnold specialises in the study of medieval religious culture, saying that while he has never been a believer in any religion, "belief" has always fascinated him. In his work he asks "Why do people believe the things they believe? What does 'believing' really mean in practice?" Arnold has also written widely about historiography. In 2008 he wrote a policy paper, Why history matters - and why medieval history also matters, for History & Policy.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 241 reviews
March 26, 2017
Why does history matter?
The closing chapter of this short book offers its own justification, and recommendation.
Beyond the idea of “learning from the past in order not to repeat it”, the author suggests history helps us understand our own identity, and put it into a wider context. He also strongly advocates studying history for the sake of practising general thinking skills. To delve into the past, and its different patterns and loosely connected events, we are forced to use both intellectual analysis and imagination, as it constitutes an act of exploring an alternative, alien world - territory outside our comfort zone.
“Visiting the past is like visiting a foreign country: they do some things the same and some things differently, but above all else they make us more aware of what we call “home”.”
This leads to the third, and most important reason why history matters: as it clarifies our own identity, and paints the pattern of our prejudices and cultural allegiances, and also makes us step out of our general context to see the world from a different angle, it helps us understand that change is possible, and necessary, for human development. We learn that many choices are open to us, and that there can’t be one single, dogmatic way of interpreting life, one owner of absolute truth in eternity. We learn to say no to propaganda aimed at suppressing parts of the story in order to emphasise others for the purpose of establishing power:
“History provides us with the tools to dissent.”
It is of major importance to the author, however, to make sure the reader does not blindly subscribe to one method of historical research, ignoring the rest. Through a number of (entertaining) case studies, he shows the reader the various ways in which history can be reconstructed, by using information gained in archives, by reading letters and speeches, by analysing objects, art and fiction of a certain time, by juxtaposing different interpretations and witness accounts and comparing them to detect a general pattern, as well as the underlying intentions of the sources in question.
He explores the narratives of ancient historians, eager to paint a canvas of history made by great (wo)men, and he shows the gaps in the records, and how adding context may fill some of them, but leave other questions unanswered. From Thukydides over Lorenzo Valla, Jean Bodin and Voltaire, to Gibbon, Ranke and Hobsbawm, we are introduced to historians and their approaches to the narrative of the past. The author emphasises the fact that those historians themselves have now become part of the past that others have to evaluate, taking their bias and purpose into account.
We may not agree with all conclusions Voltaire drew in the 18th century. But studying his thoughts will help us sharpen our intellectual power, and understand how our identity differs from his, and it will give us the tools to dissent. Voltaire would have been pleased to see us think, reflect, and finally disagree with him! That was his take on history. Pluralism lived and breathed.
Highly recommended - an utterly entertaining introduction to the most important subject in the world (bias intended!).
The closing chapter of this short book offers its own justification, and recommendation.
Beyond the idea of “learning from the past in order not to repeat it”, the author suggests history helps us understand our own identity, and put it into a wider context. He also strongly advocates studying history for the sake of practising general thinking skills. To delve into the past, and its different patterns and loosely connected events, we are forced to use both intellectual analysis and imagination, as it constitutes an act of exploring an alternative, alien world - territory outside our comfort zone.
“Visiting the past is like visiting a foreign country: they do some things the same and some things differently, but above all else they make us more aware of what we call “home”.”
This leads to the third, and most important reason why history matters: as it clarifies our own identity, and paints the pattern of our prejudices and cultural allegiances, and also makes us step out of our general context to see the world from a different angle, it helps us understand that change is possible, and necessary, for human development. We learn that many choices are open to us, and that there can’t be one single, dogmatic way of interpreting life, one owner of absolute truth in eternity. We learn to say no to propaganda aimed at suppressing parts of the story in order to emphasise others for the purpose of establishing power:
“History provides us with the tools to dissent.”
It is of major importance to the author, however, to make sure the reader does not blindly subscribe to one method of historical research, ignoring the rest. Through a number of (entertaining) case studies, he shows the reader the various ways in which history can be reconstructed, by using information gained in archives, by reading letters and speeches, by analysing objects, art and fiction of a certain time, by juxtaposing different interpretations and witness accounts and comparing them to detect a general pattern, as well as the underlying intentions of the sources in question.
He explores the narratives of ancient historians, eager to paint a canvas of history made by great (wo)men, and he shows the gaps in the records, and how adding context may fill some of them, but leave other questions unanswered. From Thukydides over Lorenzo Valla, Jean Bodin and Voltaire, to Gibbon, Ranke and Hobsbawm, we are introduced to historians and their approaches to the narrative of the past. The author emphasises the fact that those historians themselves have now become part of the past that others have to evaluate, taking their bias and purpose into account.
We may not agree with all conclusions Voltaire drew in the 18th century. But studying his thoughts will help us sharpen our intellectual power, and understand how our identity differs from his, and it will give us the tools to dissent. Voltaire would have been pleased to see us think, reflect, and finally disagree with him! That was his take on history. Pluralism lived and breathed.
Highly recommended - an utterly entertaining introduction to the most important subject in the world (bias intended!).
September 16, 2016
"The past itself is not a narrative. In its entirety, it is chaotic, uncoordinated, and complex as life. History is about making sense of that mess, finding or creating patterns and meanings and stories from the maelstrom." -- John H. Arnold, History
A friend on Facebook introduced me to this series a couple weeks ago. I usually steer towards larger books (Diary of Samuel Pepys, The History of the Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire, etc.). I like to submerge in a book, so I was initially skeptical of this format. These are short books, almost novella size (although the font being 8 or 9 point might allow Oxford's editors to squeeze a bit more in). These are books not meant for the expert, but the enthusiast. They are, as Oxford titled them, VERY SHORT INTRODUCTIONS. Perfect. There is an art to writing tight. To cutting your story, your explanation, your introduction into the fewest words possible. Things are not included, left out, obviously, but like haikus there is beauty in scarcity and there is a definite place for these books in my library. I've only finished one (This one), but I'm addicted.
I loved Arnold's voice, his take, and his approach. I think he managed to engage, explain, synthesize the history of history, and did ALL of that in just under 124 pages.
I just ordered World War II: A Very Short Introduction (for my son) and The American Revolution: A Very Short Introduction (for my daughter). I expect I will be buying more very shortly.
A friend on Facebook introduced me to this series a couple weeks ago. I usually steer towards larger books (Diary of Samuel Pepys, The History of the Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire, etc.). I like to submerge in a book, so I was initially skeptical of this format. These are short books, almost novella size (although the font being 8 or 9 point might allow Oxford's editors to squeeze a bit more in). These are books not meant for the expert, but the enthusiast. They are, as Oxford titled them, VERY SHORT INTRODUCTIONS. Perfect. There is an art to writing tight. To cutting your story, your explanation, your introduction into the fewest words possible. Things are not included, left out, obviously, but like haikus there is beauty in scarcity and there is a definite place for these books in my library. I've only finished one (This one), but I'm addicted.
I loved Arnold's voice, his take, and his approach. I think he managed to engage, explain, synthesize the history of history, and did ALL of that in just under 124 pages.
I just ordered World War II: A Very Short Introduction (for my son) and The American Revolution: A Very Short Introduction (for my daughter). I expect I will be buying more very shortly.
Read
October 21, 2024I really enjoyed reading this little book, because it is beautifully written in the first place, but also because I like the author’s point of view on the relativity of the historians profession. The past is a foreign country, there are no self-evident truths to be found over there, so an historian can only do his best at telling a true story. A story, indeed, because he’s on his own to make “sense of that mess, finding or creating patterns and meanings and stories from the maelstrom”, but nevertheless also telling a true story, that is clinging as honestly as possible to what the sources tell him/her, knowing there is not one monolithic truth. Of course, here Arnolds is dancing on a tightrope, coming very close to postmodernism. But I am convinced he has found the right balance between positivism (“wie es eigentlich”) and relativism.
My only disappointment is in the end: <>"Why does history matter?", Arnold asks. And here he is a bit too quick to dismiss three classical answers, namely to learn lessons, to provide us with an identity and to get deep fundamental insight into the human condition. Of course, there is a real danger in taking these questions and answers too seriously, but to wipe them of the table, is a bit too drastic to my taste. The study of the past isn't just a fun game: it's a deeply serious exercise in giving sense to the present and the future.
My only disappointment is in the end: <>"Why does history matter?", Arnold asks. And here he is a bit too quick to dismiss three classical answers, namely to learn lessons, to provide us with an identity and to get deep fundamental insight into the human condition. Of course, there is a real danger in taking these questions and answers too seriously, but to wipe them of the table, is a bit too drastic to my taste. The study of the past isn't just a fun game: it's a deeply serious exercise in giving sense to the present and the future.
December 13, 2017
One of the VSI's I've ever read. I also rather enjoyed the audiobook as well. It was awesome! The book was full of examples, abstract ideas and self-examinations.
The authour offers a rather friendly, yet deep yearning tendency to ask you to think and does not fear of negative views.
September 14, 2015
History as a True Story
John Arnold begins this VSI by providing a quick working definition of historiography ("the process of writing history") and history("the end result of that process"). At the end of Chapter 1, he provides a more interesting definition - that of history as "true stories".
...history is 'true' in that it must agree with the evidence, the facts that it calls upon; or else it must show why those 'facts' are wrong, and need reworking. At the same time, it is a 'story', in that it is an interpretation, placing those 'facts' within a wider framework or narrative.
This definition has other uses: while providing a brief narrative of historiography from the Greeks up until the 19th Century in Chapters 2 & 3, he describes historians as "constantly wavering back and forth between those two poles of 'truth' and 'storytelling'.
Influences
Arnold acknowledges the importance of Herodotus’ attempts to use 'evidence' in his Histories, but locates Thucydides, with his insistence on history being about ” politics and the state, and nothing else”, as a greater and constraining influence on historical accounts that followed. Similarly influential was the rhetoric style of history argued for by Sallust and Cicero, with its focus on chronological arrangement of historical events, focus on “great deeds” and an easy-flowing, persuasive narrative style.
The challenges to Thucydides’ “tower of political history” arrived first from antiquarians, described quaintly by one John Earle as ”one that hath that unnaturall disease to bee enamour’d of old age, and wrinckles, and loves all things (as Dutchmen doe cheese) the better for being mouldy and worme-eatern”. Their use of “historical evidence, both written and physical” served to make historical accounts more credible. Enlightenment thinkers further reduced the historical focus on political events by “using a study of the past to address ‘big’ questions about the nature of human existence and the workings of the world around them”. Finally, Leopold von Ranke’s insistence on a “scientific and objective history”, coupled with his seminars for students of history, marked the beginning of “history as a profession”, rather than as a vocation.
History’s debt to Marx, and a Rebecca Solnit digression
Arnold talks at length about the influence of Karl Marx on historiography, in a chapter detailing various ways of interpreting history:
One key element of Marx’s thought has become so ingrained in historians’ ideas that it is now practically taken for granted: the insight that social and economic circumstances affect the ways in which people think about themselves, their lives, the world around them...
Rebecca Solnit makes an interesting, related point on the greater-than-assumed impact of “revolutions” (associated with Marxism) in her excellent Men Explain Things to Me:
“(David) Graeber argues that they were not…primarily seizures of power in a single regime, but ruptures in which new ideas and institutions were born, and the impact spread. As he puts it, “the Russian Revolution of 1917 was a world revolution ultimately responsible for the New Deal and European welfare states as much as for Soviet communism.””
Arnold also dedicates a chapter each to historical sources, and the notion of the past as a “foreign country”.
Histories, Truths
Arnold argues persuasively against the idea of “history as a single true story” in the final chapter:
The danger in deciding in favour of one account against another is that it aims to mould ‘history’ into a single true story. This is the logic too of seeking an ‘objective’ and ‘scientific’ history, neither of which is possible…both are attempts by subjective historians (with their own prejudices, class interests, sexual politics) to present their version of history as the only possible version.
He also tackles popular suggestions on “why history matters” and offers some suggestions of his own – enjoyment, a tool with which to think, and as an argument for change:
When presented with some dogmatist claiming that ‘this is the only course of action’ or ‘this is how things have always been’, history allows us to demur, to point out that there have always been many courses of action, many ways of being. History provides us with the tools to dissent.
More power to dissent, says I.
John Arnold begins this VSI by providing a quick working definition of historiography ("the process of writing history") and history("the end result of that process"). At the end of Chapter 1, he provides a more interesting definition - that of history as "true stories".
...history is 'true' in that it must agree with the evidence, the facts that it calls upon; or else it must show why those 'facts' are wrong, and need reworking. At the same time, it is a 'story', in that it is an interpretation, placing those 'facts' within a wider framework or narrative.
This definition has other uses: while providing a brief narrative of historiography from the Greeks up until the 19th Century in Chapters 2 & 3, he describes historians as "constantly wavering back and forth between those two poles of 'truth' and 'storytelling'.
Influences
Arnold acknowledges the importance of Herodotus’ attempts to use 'evidence' in his Histories, but locates Thucydides, with his insistence on history being about ” politics and the state, and nothing else”, as a greater and constraining influence on historical accounts that followed. Similarly influential was the rhetoric style of history argued for by Sallust and Cicero, with its focus on chronological arrangement of historical events, focus on “great deeds” and an easy-flowing, persuasive narrative style.
The challenges to Thucydides’ “tower of political history” arrived first from antiquarians, described quaintly by one John Earle as ”one that hath that unnaturall disease to bee enamour’d of old age, and wrinckles, and loves all things (as Dutchmen doe cheese) the better for being mouldy and worme-eatern”. Their use of “historical evidence, both written and physical” served to make historical accounts more credible. Enlightenment thinkers further reduced the historical focus on political events by “using a study of the past to address ‘big’ questions about the nature of human existence and the workings of the world around them”. Finally, Leopold von Ranke’s insistence on a “scientific and objective history”, coupled with his seminars for students of history, marked the beginning of “history as a profession”, rather than as a vocation.
History’s debt to Marx, and a Rebecca Solnit digression
Arnold talks at length about the influence of Karl Marx on historiography, in a chapter detailing various ways of interpreting history:
One key element of Marx’s thought has become so ingrained in historians’ ideas that it is now practically taken for granted: the insight that social and economic circumstances affect the ways in which people think about themselves, their lives, the world around them...
Rebecca Solnit makes an interesting, related point on the greater-than-assumed impact of “revolutions” (associated with Marxism) in her excellent Men Explain Things to Me:
“(David) Graeber argues that they were not…primarily seizures of power in a single regime, but ruptures in which new ideas and institutions were born, and the impact spread. As he puts it, “the Russian Revolution of 1917 was a world revolution ultimately responsible for the New Deal and European welfare states as much as for Soviet communism.””
Arnold also dedicates a chapter each to historical sources, and the notion of the past as a “foreign country”.
Histories, Truths
Arnold argues persuasively against the idea of “history as a single true story” in the final chapter:
The danger in deciding in favour of one account against another is that it aims to mould ‘history’ into a single true story. This is the logic too of seeking an ‘objective’ and ‘scientific’ history, neither of which is possible…both are attempts by subjective historians (with their own prejudices, class interests, sexual politics) to present their version of history as the only possible version.
He also tackles popular suggestions on “why history matters” and offers some suggestions of his own – enjoyment, a tool with which to think, and as an argument for change:
When presented with some dogmatist claiming that ‘this is the only course of action’ or ‘this is how things have always been’, history allows us to demur, to point out that there have always been many courses of action, many ways of being. History provides us with the tools to dissent.
More power to dissent, says I.
February 1, 2017
چرا خواندن تاریخ لازم است؟ ساز و کار تاریخ نگاری چیست؟ سندها و مدرک ها چگونه در یافتن واقعیت و نگارش تاریخ یاری رسان مورخ هستند؟
در کتاب به این سه پرسش اساسی پرداخته شده و همه ی اینها در کمترین زمان و کمترین زیاده گویی با روشی موردی بیان شده است. برای خواننده ی علاقمند این کتاب خودش دریچه ای ست برای بهترین خواندن و درک درست تری از ماهیت تاریخ. ترجمه ی خوب احمدرضا تقا هم افزون بر همه ی اینها
در کتاب به این سه پرسش اساسی پرداخته شده و همه ی اینها در کمترین زمان و کمترین زیاده گویی با روشی موردی بیان شده است. برای خواننده ی علاقمند این کتاب خودش دریچه ای ست برای بهترین خواندن و درک درست تری از ماهیت تاریخ. ترجمه ی خوب احمدرضا تقا هم افزون بر همه ی اینها
September 26, 2021
A very short introduction, indeed, but also interesting! This is clearly the work of a historian with experience. Arnold has enough insight into the theoretical context of the historical profession, but he is down-to-earth enough to also see the downside of too much theory. Still, I have some critical remarks on this introduction. See my review in my History-account on Goodreads: https://www.goodreads.com/review/show....
July 20, 2016
كتاب ممتاز لمن أراد التعرف على علم التاريخ وتطوره في الغرب
Read
September 12, 2015It's short. It's less a true 'historiography' in that it doesn't get into method or theory and is more a history of history. To quote a far more able reviewer. "This is an extremely engaging book, lively, enthusiastic and highly readable, which presents some of the fundamental problems of historical writing in a lucid and accessible manner. As an invitation to the study of history it should be difficult to resist."--Peter Burke, Emmanuel College, Cambridge.
September 20, 2020
This is best read slowly, savouring Arnold’s elegant, insightful commentary and examples and reflecting on how and why history matters. Although not as entertaining as ‘What is Medieval History’ (reviewed February 2018), this sassy little volume from Oxford University Press punches well above its (literal) weight in offering an engaging examination of methodologies, discourses and the interpretation of source material.
December 8, 2016
کتاب بسیار شیرین و مختصر و همانطور که نویسنده قصد داشته انگیزه مطالعات بعدی را ایجاد می کند اغلب مفاهیم بنیادی تاریخ نویسی با شرح و مثال هایی جذاب با زبان و البته ترجمه ای روان ارایه شده اند
کتاب در عین حال که مختصر و مفید است اما به طرح موضوعات عمیق فلسفی روش شناختی در مورد بنیان های علم تاریخ هم پرداخته. فهرست کتاب ممکن است کمی خواننده را به غلط بیاندازد اما مطالب ضمن ساختار روایی و نثر روان و جذاب، به موضوعات چالش های اساسی تاریخ نویسی و نظرات مختلف در مورد ان ها پرداخته. بخشی از کتاب نیز به تحولات تاریخ نویسی تا قرن اخیر پرداخته.
فقط کاش در مورد لغات کلیدی و تخصصی پانویس معادل های انگلیسی بیشتر بود
کتاب در عین حال که مختصر و مفید است اما به طرح موضوعات عمیق فلسفی روش شناختی در مورد بنیان های علم تاریخ هم پرداخته. فهرست کتاب ممکن است کمی خواننده را به غلط بیاندازد اما مطالب ضمن ساختار روایی و نثر روان و جذاب، به موضوعات چالش های اساسی تاریخ نویسی و نظرات مختلف در مورد ان ها پرداخته. بخشی از کتاب نیز به تحولات تاریخ نویسی تا قرن اخیر پرداخته.
فقط کاش در مورد لغات کلیدی و تخصصی پانویس معادل های انگلیسی بیشتر بود
June 27, 2025
Good for what it is, but really begs for more detail and color in a lot of spots. Still a great introduction to historiography and how the understanding of history has changed over time.
March 21, 2023
a wretched publication
March 16, 2017
Short and sweet. Good reminder of some simple and central points. Now I want to read about the Cathars and the English Civil War.
January 6, 2022
The author provides readers with a good overview of European historiography, but he’s not very good on non-European themes, and it’s kind of hard to imagine the author’s intended audience. I will confess that the book’s early chapters gave me a few ideas about introducing the discipline to college students. And maybe the book would make a good stocking stuffer for future historians. After all, he warns people that historians should know a few languages and be prepared to live in the archives. (Not sure he’s heard of the Internet and digitized archives—but he’s an historian, so that’s no crime.) Finally, this very short book should have been half as long.
September 13, 2022
این خیلی خوب بود.
September 20, 2023
“Reader, this is history; history, this is reader.”
"History: A Very Short Introduction" is indeed a short book, but it punches above its page count. Arnold provides a very good introduction to historiography that is engagingly well-written, enjoyable, and illustrative. Using a number of short stories that he picks apart, the author does a great job of presenting what it means to read, study, and write history - tips, tricks, and caveats.
The book is mostly meant more for readers with an interest in scholarly history, but it is - in a way - arguably all the more important for readers of pop-history books. Because “historians always get things ‘wrong’ [...] every historical account has gaps, problems, contradictions, areas of uncertainty,” but “historians always attempt to get it ‘right’ [and] never fabricate ‘the facts’.” The same can not always be said about pop-histor(ians), be they authors, podcasters, or [insert disperser of history].
Highly recommended for anyone that consumes or produces history - id est everyone.
"History: A Very Short Introduction" is indeed a short book, but it punches above its page count. Arnold provides a very good introduction to historiography that is engagingly well-written, enjoyable, and illustrative. Using a number of short stories that he picks apart, the author does a great job of presenting what it means to read, study, and write history - tips, tricks, and caveats.
The book is mostly meant more for readers with an interest in scholarly history, but it is - in a way - arguably all the more important for readers of pop-history books. Because “historians always get things ‘wrong’ [...] every historical account has gaps, problems, contradictions, areas of uncertainty,” but “historians always attempt to get it ‘right’ [and] never fabricate ‘the facts’.” The same can not always be said about pop-histor(ians), be they authors, podcasters, or [insert disperser of history].
Highly recommended for anyone that consumes or produces history - id est everyone.
June 17, 2016
This is one of the most fascinating History books I have read. I would generally avoid the beginners guide, for dummies and short introductions, fearing that they generalise too much and offer nothing of substance. However, this one is completely different: Apart from very lucid writing and engaging structure, it makes profound points in a short space! This is one of those books, which, despite its size, i could not have read it one evening: I would read a bit, stop and think, not for the difficulty of understanding, but for the insights it provided and the train of thought it unleashed. In short, one of the most enjoyable books I have ever read! I shall recommend this to everyone, even to those who are not particularly interested in history; may be, particularly to them, as this may be the ideal portal to start the pursuit of history.
March 4, 2013
I'm just starting a Masters program in History, and I found Arnold's Short History an excellent introduction into the historian's craft. For what it sets out to do, it really should be rated 5 stars. The books breaks down, at a high level, the evolution of historiography, but always reminds the student/reader that the varied contemporary methodologies, although different than what we would use today, often had the same goals: the portrayal of historic truth. (That's not to say that history hasn't been greatly abused for various purposes).
I particularly enjoyed the object lessons provided that illustrated what the historian is able to do, and not able to do. I learned quite a bit from the short work.
I particularly enjoyed the object lessons provided that illustrated what the historian is able to do, and not able to do. I learned quite a bit from the short work.
February 10, 2014
I assign (and re-read) this every year for the class I teach in historical methods, and I always find new aspects of it to admire. Arnold models how to be concise without being superficial.
September 3, 2023
This was boring and long-winded despite how short the actual book is. The writing wasn't my favorite either. Will happily be returning it to the bookstore after I'm done with this class!
December 25, 2020
“What is history?”
“Who gets to write history?”
“Why are there different accounts of historical events?”
“Is history an ultimate truth?”
“Why does history matter?”
These are often questions we ask ourselves when we talk about history, of course, besides “why the hell am I obliged to memorize these random dates and names in school”. “History: A Very Short Introduction” by John H. Arnold breaks these questions down, by recounting stories of the pasts, and exploring how history gets to be written.
History as a True Story
Arnold started the book examining what history is. He distinguishes between ‘past events’, historiography (“the process of writing history”) and history (“the end result of that process”). He then explores how past events – gets processed into becoming – a history, and the subjectivity that surrounds that process. For example, he highlights that we cannot tell every story from the past, but only some of them, and so, history is made up only of those things that caught up our attention, and we are often caught up with bundles of interests, morals, ethics, philosophies, and ideas on how the world works. He asserts that history is above all else an argument: between historians, between past and present, between accounts of what actually happened, and what is going to happen next.
At the end of Chapter 1, Arnold provides an interesting definition of history as “true stories”.
“…history is ‘true’ in that it must agree with the evidence, the facts that it calls upon; or else it must show why those ‘facts’ are wrong, and need reworking. At the same time, it is a ‘story’, in that it is an interpretation, placing those ‘facts’ within a wider framework or narrative.”
He also cautioned us into thinking that the past as narratives. Instead, it is “chaotic, uncoordinated and complex” and history is about making sense of that mess.
History in the past: various influences and approaches
The book then delves into understanding what history has been in the past, acknowledging the significance of Herodotus’ attempt to use ‘evidence’ in his histories, but sees Thucydides’ insistence on history being about “politics and the state, and nothing else” as a constraining influence. Rhetoric was also seen as influential, as other elements and approaches emerge. Later on, Leopold von Ranke’s insistence on a ‘scientific’ approach to history marked the beginning of “history as a profession”. This tale of history in the past is used to show readers that past people have different ideas about truth and the purpose of writing about true stories. He ended the second chapter by saying that “history is to society what memory is to an individual”, and that it gives people an identity. “But whose memories and which things to remember?”
In a later chapter about various ways of interpreting history, Arnold acknowledges Karl Marx’s influence particularly of his “insight that social and economic circumstances affect the ways in which people think about themselves, their lives, the world around them” and hence history is “made by people in circumstances beyond their choosing”. But Arnold argues that people affect those circumstances in the lives they lead, and
“most, if not all, of what happens, is the result of people trying to achieve certain ends…People do things, for reasons, and within their circumstances linked to their own presents. But the things they do cause ripples…interacting with ripples from million other lives. Somewhere, in the patterns formed by these colliding waves, history happens.”
Voices and silences
In chapter 4, Arnold reminds us to approach history consciously and cautiously, by examining the use of archive and documentary sources. Archives are systematic repositories of information which are anything that has left us a trace of the past. This can be a lot of things, and historians usually need a clue or an idea that pushes them to a certain set of sources. This means that they have to make choices and decisions before they ever lay eyes on the evidence. Hence there are two ways to look at this: one is that history begins with sources, another way in which it begins is with historians themselves: their ideas, interests, and circumstances.
In examining sources, caution must be taken for forgeries and bias. No source is without bias, but these biases, once identified, does not need to be discarded. It can actually inform us of the opinions of the past. Bias, as argued by Arnold, is not something to find and eradicate, but rather to hunt and embrace.
Additionally, it is also important to look at what the document does not say – the silences, and that historian has to do some guessworks to bridge the gap. Because of these gaps, spaces and silences, there are always new questions to ask, as there are new ways at looking, different paths traveled, and things seen before or after.
“that history, which aims at the whole truth, cannot ever reach it … because of the myriad things which must remain unknown; but that it is this very problem which allows – or rather, demands – that the past be a subject for study, instead of a self-evident truth … History has a beginning in sources, but also in the gaps within and between sources. We must have sources – but we must have silences too.”
Arnold then reflects on how we think of the people in the past, whether they were essentially the same as us, or different. He attempted to examine the thought process of the people in the past.
Are people from the past too difficult to understand? While every person in every time is born and will die, their ideas of those processes vary wildly. Hence, it is important to be conscious of the nuances of past language when we are examining the past.
Histories as Truths
Arnold argues against the idea of “history as a single true story”. To decide one version as the only true story means that the others need to be discarded. He argues that if we ask for one, sole, Truth, we may silence other possible voices, different histories, although this does not mean that historians should not aim at truth.
“The danger in deciding in favour of one account against another is that it aims to mould ‘history’ into a single true story. This is the logic too of seeking an ‘objective’ and ‘scientific’ history, neither of which is possible…both are attempts by subjective historians (with their own prejudices, class interests, sexual politics) to present their version of history as the only possible version.”
However he also argues that this does not mean that historians should abandon the truth, nor should this lead to absolute relativism. Rather history should present the complexity of the true stories, and shall not prevent ourselves from asking further questions.
Why does history matter?
So if history is so complex and difficult, why does it matter? Arnold dismissed the three popular answers: to learn lessons for the present, to provide us with an identity, and to get deep fundamental insight into the human condition. Instead, he suggested three answers of his own: for enjoyment, a tool with which to think, and an argument for change.
“When presented with some dogmatist claiming that ‘this is the only course of action’ or ‘this is how things have always been’, history allows us to demur, to point out that there have always been many courses of action, many ways of being. History provides us with the tools to dissent.”
—
Generally, I appreciate this book as it explores how we should approach history, rather than the technical aspect that often bores and scares people away. I also like how the argument is presented, not as a process of refinement, but rather simply as an interesting exploration. It also helps us understand how history is written and why caution must be taken before taking any narrative of history as final and one true account. While I personally would not remember most of the historical facts and anecdotes mentioned in the book, I believe any reader will come away with a better understanding of history and probably a more nuanced approach to life in general.
“Who gets to write history?”
“Why are there different accounts of historical events?”
“Is history an ultimate truth?”
“Why does history matter?”
These are often questions we ask ourselves when we talk about history, of course, besides “why the hell am I obliged to memorize these random dates and names in school”. “History: A Very Short Introduction” by John H. Arnold breaks these questions down, by recounting stories of the pasts, and exploring how history gets to be written.
History as a True Story
Arnold started the book examining what history is. He distinguishes between ‘past events’, historiography (“the process of writing history”) and history (“the end result of that process”). He then explores how past events – gets processed into becoming – a history, and the subjectivity that surrounds that process. For example, he highlights that we cannot tell every story from the past, but only some of them, and so, history is made up only of those things that caught up our attention, and we are often caught up with bundles of interests, morals, ethics, philosophies, and ideas on how the world works. He asserts that history is above all else an argument: between historians, between past and present, between accounts of what actually happened, and what is going to happen next.
At the end of Chapter 1, Arnold provides an interesting definition of history as “true stories”.
“…history is ‘true’ in that it must agree with the evidence, the facts that it calls upon; or else it must show why those ‘facts’ are wrong, and need reworking. At the same time, it is a ‘story’, in that it is an interpretation, placing those ‘facts’ within a wider framework or narrative.”
He also cautioned us into thinking that the past as narratives. Instead, it is “chaotic, uncoordinated and complex” and history is about making sense of that mess.
History in the past: various influences and approaches
The book then delves into understanding what history has been in the past, acknowledging the significance of Herodotus’ attempt to use ‘evidence’ in his histories, but sees Thucydides’ insistence on history being about “politics and the state, and nothing else” as a constraining influence. Rhetoric was also seen as influential, as other elements and approaches emerge. Later on, Leopold von Ranke’s insistence on a ‘scientific’ approach to history marked the beginning of “history as a profession”. This tale of history in the past is used to show readers that past people have different ideas about truth and the purpose of writing about true stories. He ended the second chapter by saying that “history is to society what memory is to an individual”, and that it gives people an identity. “But whose memories and which things to remember?”
In a later chapter about various ways of interpreting history, Arnold acknowledges Karl Marx’s influence particularly of his “insight that social and economic circumstances affect the ways in which people think about themselves, their lives, the world around them” and hence history is “made by people in circumstances beyond their choosing”. But Arnold argues that people affect those circumstances in the lives they lead, and
“most, if not all, of what happens, is the result of people trying to achieve certain ends…People do things, for reasons, and within their circumstances linked to their own presents. But the things they do cause ripples…interacting with ripples from million other lives. Somewhere, in the patterns formed by these colliding waves, history happens.”
Voices and silences
In chapter 4, Arnold reminds us to approach history consciously and cautiously, by examining the use of archive and documentary sources. Archives are systematic repositories of information which are anything that has left us a trace of the past. This can be a lot of things, and historians usually need a clue or an idea that pushes them to a certain set of sources. This means that they have to make choices and decisions before they ever lay eyes on the evidence. Hence there are two ways to look at this: one is that history begins with sources, another way in which it begins is with historians themselves: their ideas, interests, and circumstances.
In examining sources, caution must be taken for forgeries and bias. No source is without bias, but these biases, once identified, does not need to be discarded. It can actually inform us of the opinions of the past. Bias, as argued by Arnold, is not something to find and eradicate, but rather to hunt and embrace.
Additionally, it is also important to look at what the document does not say – the silences, and that historian has to do some guessworks to bridge the gap. Because of these gaps, spaces and silences, there are always new questions to ask, as there are new ways at looking, different paths traveled, and things seen before or after.
“that history, which aims at the whole truth, cannot ever reach it … because of the myriad things which must remain unknown; but that it is this very problem which allows – or rather, demands – that the past be a subject for study, instead of a self-evident truth … History has a beginning in sources, but also in the gaps within and between sources. We must have sources – but we must have silences too.”
Arnold then reflects on how we think of the people in the past, whether they were essentially the same as us, or different. He attempted to examine the thought process of the people in the past.
Are people from the past too difficult to understand? While every person in every time is born and will die, their ideas of those processes vary wildly. Hence, it is important to be conscious of the nuances of past language when we are examining the past.
Histories as Truths
Arnold argues against the idea of “history as a single true story”. To decide one version as the only true story means that the others need to be discarded. He argues that if we ask for one, sole, Truth, we may silence other possible voices, different histories, although this does not mean that historians should not aim at truth.
“The danger in deciding in favour of one account against another is that it aims to mould ‘history’ into a single true story. This is the logic too of seeking an ‘objective’ and ‘scientific’ history, neither of which is possible…both are attempts by subjective historians (with their own prejudices, class interests, sexual politics) to present their version of history as the only possible version.”
However he also argues that this does not mean that historians should abandon the truth, nor should this lead to absolute relativism. Rather history should present the complexity of the true stories, and shall not prevent ourselves from asking further questions.
Why does history matter?
So if history is so complex and difficult, why does it matter? Arnold dismissed the three popular answers: to learn lessons for the present, to provide us with an identity, and to get deep fundamental insight into the human condition. Instead, he suggested three answers of his own: for enjoyment, a tool with which to think, and an argument for change.
“When presented with some dogmatist claiming that ‘this is the only course of action’ or ‘this is how things have always been’, history allows us to demur, to point out that there have always been many courses of action, many ways of being. History provides us with the tools to dissent.”
—
Generally, I appreciate this book as it explores how we should approach history, rather than the technical aspect that often bores and scares people away. I also like how the argument is presented, not as a process of refinement, but rather simply as an interesting exploration. It also helps us understand how history is written and why caution must be taken before taking any narrative of history as final and one true account. While I personally would not remember most of the historical facts and anecdotes mentioned in the book, I believe any reader will come away with a better understanding of history and probably a more nuanced approach to life in general.
January 15, 2026
Mission 2026: Binge reviewing all previous Reads, I was too slothful to review back when I read them
This book is deceptively concise. On the surface, it is one of Oxford University Press’s “Very Short Introduction” series—meant to distill complex subjects into digestible form—but within its slim pages, it contains a subtle intellectual sweep that challenges how we think about the past, time, and knowledge itself.
Reading it is less like reading a textbook and more like attending a conversation with a thoughtful historian who constantly nudges you to reconsider your assumptions.
Arnold’s opening premise is strikingly simple yet profound: history is not a neutral recounting of “what happened.” Rather, it is an active practice, a construction that blends evidence, interpretation, and imagination.
From the outset, he dislodges the comforting notion of history as a static sequence of dates, kings, and wars. Instead, history becomes a dynamic process, a lens through which societies understand themselves.
This framing is liberating—it allows the reader to appreciate that history is simultaneously intellectual, cultural, and political.
One of the key strengths of the book is its accessibility without sacrificing rigor. Arnold begins by addressing the fundamental question: what is history?
Here, he avoids pedantic definitions. Instead, he engages with the notion that historians do not simply “uncover” facts but interpret them, balancing evidence with context.
He introduces readers to debates that span centuries: empirical history versus narrative history, history as fact versus history as meaning, and the tension between chronological sequencing and thematic understanding. These distinctions are subtle, but Arnold illuminates them with clarity, ensuring the reader is guided without ever being patronized.
Arnold also emphasizes the importance of method and source criticism. He explores how evidence—documents, inscriptions, material culture, oral traditions—must be interrogated, not accepted at face value. For instance, the difference between the historian’s approach to a medieval chronicle versus a modern newspaper article is carefully explained, revealing the interpretive labor historians must perform.
This attention to evidence reminds us that history is not simply a story waiting to be told but a puzzle demanding reasoning, imagination, and ethical judgment.
Another notable aspect of the book is Arnold’s treatment of historical change and continuity. He underscores that understanding the past requires recognizing patterns, structures, and processes, but also anomalies and surprises.
History is simultaneously ordinary and extraordinary, mundane and dramatic. This duality is illustrated through examples ranging from everyday social practices to major political upheavals. Arnold succeeds in demonstrating that history is not just the story of rulers and wars but also the story of ordinary people, collective mentalities, and the complex mechanisms of social life.
A particularly compelling chapter examines the uses of history. Arnold explores how history has been employed for political ends, national identity formation, and moral instruction. He draws attention to the fact that historical narratives are rarely neutral: they reflect contemporary concerns, ideological preferences, and social pressures.
In doing so, he positions history not just as an academic discipline but as a profoundly human practice that mediates our understanding of ourselves and our world.
This is where the book feels particularly urgent in the contemporary moment, when debates about “truth” and historical memory are increasingly contentious.
Arnold also addresses the philosophical dimensions of history, engaging with questions about temporality, causation, and meaning. He considers the challenges of representing time, the problem of historical inevitability, and the paradox of historical knowledge: how can we know the past when we are irreversibly part of the present?
These reflections elevate the book from a practical guide to a deeply contemplative exploration of the nature of historical consciousness. Here, Arnold’s voice is gentle but insistent, inviting readers to think critically about their own assumptions about time, causality, and narrative.
The prose throughout is elegant and measured, combining precision with readability. Arnold avoids jargon, but he does not simplify; instead, he provides nuanced explanations that reward careful reading.
His examples are judicious, drawn from a wide chronological and geographical range, ensuring that the discussion remains globally resonant rather than Eurocentric.
This attention to inclusivity—though subtle—reminds readers that history is not a fixed narrative but a multiplicity of perspectives and experiences.
For a reader like me, trained in literature rather than history, Arnold’s approach is particularly enlightening. He bridges the gap between historical method and literary sensitivity, demonstrating that interpretation, narrative construction, and textual analysis are shared concerns across disciplines.
One comes away with the sense that studying history is not merely accumulating facts but learning to read the past critically, empathetically, and imaginatively.
The book inspires humility: the past is always more complex than our assumptions, and understanding it demands patience and attentiveness.
By the conclusion, Arnold has done more than outline the discipline; he has subtly transformed the reader’s sense of what history is and why it matters.
History emerges as an ethical and intellectual endeavor—a dialogue with the past that illuminates the present and shapes our imagination of the future.
In fewer than 150 pages, the book conveys both the rigor and the wonder of historical practice, showing that history is a conversation across time, a negotiation between evidence and interpretation, and a continual rethinking of human experience.
Ultimately, ‘History: A Very Short Introduction’ is deceptively powerful. It is concise, approachable, and elegant, yet it engages with the deepest questions about knowledge, time, and human understanding.
For anyone curious about the past—not just the “what” but the “how” and “why”—Arnold provides a masterful guide.
Reading it is less about finishing a book than beginning a practice: learning to think historically, to interrogate narratives, to recognize the complexity of human lives, and to appreciate the fragile, constructed, and endlessly fascinating nature of the past.
In short, it is not merely an introduction; it is a subtle invitation to think, question, and engage with the human story in all its complexity.
Most recommended.
This book is deceptively concise. On the surface, it is one of Oxford University Press’s “Very Short Introduction” series—meant to distill complex subjects into digestible form—but within its slim pages, it contains a subtle intellectual sweep that challenges how we think about the past, time, and knowledge itself.
Reading it is less like reading a textbook and more like attending a conversation with a thoughtful historian who constantly nudges you to reconsider your assumptions.
Arnold’s opening premise is strikingly simple yet profound: history is not a neutral recounting of “what happened.” Rather, it is an active practice, a construction that blends evidence, interpretation, and imagination.
From the outset, he dislodges the comforting notion of history as a static sequence of dates, kings, and wars. Instead, history becomes a dynamic process, a lens through which societies understand themselves.
This framing is liberating—it allows the reader to appreciate that history is simultaneously intellectual, cultural, and political.
One of the key strengths of the book is its accessibility without sacrificing rigor. Arnold begins by addressing the fundamental question: what is history?
Here, he avoids pedantic definitions. Instead, he engages with the notion that historians do not simply “uncover” facts but interpret them, balancing evidence with context.
He introduces readers to debates that span centuries: empirical history versus narrative history, history as fact versus history as meaning, and the tension between chronological sequencing and thematic understanding. These distinctions are subtle, but Arnold illuminates them with clarity, ensuring the reader is guided without ever being patronized.
Arnold also emphasizes the importance of method and source criticism. He explores how evidence—documents, inscriptions, material culture, oral traditions—must be interrogated, not accepted at face value. For instance, the difference between the historian’s approach to a medieval chronicle versus a modern newspaper article is carefully explained, revealing the interpretive labor historians must perform.
This attention to evidence reminds us that history is not simply a story waiting to be told but a puzzle demanding reasoning, imagination, and ethical judgment.
Another notable aspect of the book is Arnold’s treatment of historical change and continuity. He underscores that understanding the past requires recognizing patterns, structures, and processes, but also anomalies and surprises.
History is simultaneously ordinary and extraordinary, mundane and dramatic. This duality is illustrated through examples ranging from everyday social practices to major political upheavals. Arnold succeeds in demonstrating that history is not just the story of rulers and wars but also the story of ordinary people, collective mentalities, and the complex mechanisms of social life.
A particularly compelling chapter examines the uses of history. Arnold explores how history has been employed for political ends, national identity formation, and moral instruction. He draws attention to the fact that historical narratives are rarely neutral: they reflect contemporary concerns, ideological preferences, and social pressures.
In doing so, he positions history not just as an academic discipline but as a profoundly human practice that mediates our understanding of ourselves and our world.
This is where the book feels particularly urgent in the contemporary moment, when debates about “truth” and historical memory are increasingly contentious.
Arnold also addresses the philosophical dimensions of history, engaging with questions about temporality, causation, and meaning. He considers the challenges of representing time, the problem of historical inevitability, and the paradox of historical knowledge: how can we know the past when we are irreversibly part of the present?
These reflections elevate the book from a practical guide to a deeply contemplative exploration of the nature of historical consciousness. Here, Arnold’s voice is gentle but insistent, inviting readers to think critically about their own assumptions about time, causality, and narrative.
The prose throughout is elegant and measured, combining precision with readability. Arnold avoids jargon, but he does not simplify; instead, he provides nuanced explanations that reward careful reading.
His examples are judicious, drawn from a wide chronological and geographical range, ensuring that the discussion remains globally resonant rather than Eurocentric.
This attention to inclusivity—though subtle—reminds readers that history is not a fixed narrative but a multiplicity of perspectives and experiences.
For a reader like me, trained in literature rather than history, Arnold’s approach is particularly enlightening. He bridges the gap between historical method and literary sensitivity, demonstrating that interpretation, narrative construction, and textual analysis are shared concerns across disciplines.
One comes away with the sense that studying history is not merely accumulating facts but learning to read the past critically, empathetically, and imaginatively.
The book inspires humility: the past is always more complex than our assumptions, and understanding it demands patience and attentiveness.
By the conclusion, Arnold has done more than outline the discipline; he has subtly transformed the reader’s sense of what history is and why it matters.
History emerges as an ethical and intellectual endeavor—a dialogue with the past that illuminates the present and shapes our imagination of the future.
In fewer than 150 pages, the book conveys both the rigor and the wonder of historical practice, showing that history is a conversation across time, a negotiation between evidence and interpretation, and a continual rethinking of human experience.
Ultimately, ‘History: A Very Short Introduction’ is deceptively powerful. It is concise, approachable, and elegant, yet it engages with the deepest questions about knowledge, time, and human understanding.
For anyone curious about the past—not just the “what” but the “how” and “why”—Arnold provides a masterful guide.
Reading it is less about finishing a book than beginning a practice: learning to think historically, to interrogate narratives, to recognize the complexity of human lives, and to appreciate the fragile, constructed, and endlessly fascinating nature of the past.
In short, it is not merely an introduction; it is a subtle invitation to think, question, and engage with the human story in all its complexity.
Most recommended.
October 5, 2023
کتاب مختصر مفید(۵) تاریخ چکیده و خلاصه مفیدی از مفهوم تاریخ، تاریخ نویسی، روش های مطالعه و نگاه به تاریخ، سبک های کشف حقایق تاریخی و مفاهیمی مثل آرشیو و سند و مدرک و عتیقه و .... است.
تاریخ نویسی در بدو تشکیل در حقیقت انشعابی از داستان و قصه نویسی بوده و فرق مورخین باستانی با مورخین جدی همین است که گروه اول داستان تاریخی را مینوشتند و گروه دوم در جستجوی حقیقت تاریخی هستند. با گذشت زمان به تدریج خواست جامعه تغییر کرد و از مطالعه قصه و رمان به سمت مطالبه اطلاع از حقایق تاریخی میل پیدا کرد. همین تغییر رویه باعث شد امروز دسترسی های بهتری به سرنوشت و سرگذشت پیشینیان داشته باشیم
مطالعه تاریخ به قول نویسنده ۳ منفعت دارد
یکی لذت مثل لذت از موسیقی و هنر و فیلم و نقاشی
دوم استفاده از تاریخ برای بهتر فکرکردن و سوم اینکه وقتی بهتر فکر کردیم میتوان بهتر هم تصمیم گرفت و عمل کرد.
ولی بهتر از هر تاریخی ادبیات کشورها و ملت ها گویای وضعیت آنهاست.
تاریخ سلسله حقایقی که یک دروغ بزرگ رو پنهان میکنن
اما ادبیات مجموعه دروغ هایی که میخوان یک حقیقت بزرگ رو آشکار کنن
تاریخ نویسی در بدو تشکیل در حقیقت انشعابی از داستان و قصه نویسی بوده و فرق مورخین باستانی با مورخین جدی همین است که گروه اول داستان تاریخی را مینوشتند و گروه دوم در جستجوی حقیقت تاریخی هستند. با گذشت زمان به تدریج خواست جامعه تغییر کرد و از مطالعه قصه و رمان به سمت مطالبه اطلاع از حقایق تاریخی میل پیدا کرد. همین تغییر رویه باعث شد امروز دسترسی های بهتری به سرنوشت و سرگذشت پیشینیان داشته باشیم
مطالعه تاریخ به قول نویسنده ۳ منفعت دارد
یکی لذت مثل لذت از موسیقی و هنر و فیلم و نقاشی
دوم استفاده از تاریخ برای بهتر فکرکردن و سوم اینکه وقتی بهتر فکر کردیم میتوان بهتر هم تصمیم گرفت و عمل کرد.
ولی بهتر از هر تاریخی ادبیات کشورها و ملت ها گویای وضعیت آنهاست.
تاریخ سلسله حقایقی که یک دروغ بزرگ رو پنهان میکنن
اما ادبیات مجموعه دروغ هایی که میخوان یک حقیقت بزرگ رو آشکار کنن
January 21, 2022
A good and well written introduction to what history means, how it's used, how it's done. You could always argue for X thing to be included but I think he covers most things you could expect to. Most chapters he focuses on a particular event from history and uses it to discuss a different aspect of how we understand history, how historical analysis is done, the struggle of approaching something like "the truth". Each of these events are interesting in themselves - an early 1300s murder to avoid someone exposing "heretics" to the inquisition, the story of a puritan preacher who went from England to America and back again and the family he left behind...
Often the book focuses more on asking questions than giving answers, but that's kind of the point - it's great for questioning the assumptions people might come into history with and pointing out how difficult it is to provide a definite understanding of the past.
Often the book focuses more on asking questions than giving answers, but that's kind of the point - it's great for questioning the assumptions people might come into history with and pointing out how difficult it is to provide a definite understanding of the past.
April 19, 2023
I stumbled across this "A Very Short Introduction" series at the library and immediately fell in love. It exactly meets my desire to read about extremely esoteric topics (e.g., a history of the process of studying history) without requiring decades of my life.
Bonus: this first read in the series (History: A Very Short Introduction) is superb. John H. Arnold's writing is crisp and clever and smartly features numerous callbacks to previously introduced ideas. It's basically the best college-level history class you could ever take, but at your own pace and without a graded exam at the end.
You'll learn how the concept of "history" has changed over the years, as well as how the process of uncovering and recounting history has changed. It's all deeply fascinating and is a wonderful reminder of the unconscious biases we experience every day when recalling the past. Everyone just needs a few more grains of salt!
Bonus: this first read in the series (History: A Very Short Introduction) is superb. John H. Arnold's writing is crisp and clever and smartly features numerous callbacks to previously introduced ideas. It's basically the best college-level history class you could ever take, but at your own pace and without a graded exam at the end.
You'll learn how the concept of "history" has changed over the years, as well as how the process of uncovering and recounting history has changed. It's all deeply fascinating and is a wonderful reminder of the unconscious biases we experience every day when recalling the past. Everyone just needs a few more grains of salt!
August 7, 2019
اینتروداکشن به معنای دقیق کلمه. مختصر و مفید به معنای دقیق کلمه. خیلی به درد افرادی میخوره که تاریخ رو به صورت آکادمیک نمیخونند ولی علاقهمندند بهش یا با توجه به رشتهشون کمی به تاریخ نیاز دارند و همچنین افرادی که ترم یک/دو کارشناسی تاریخ هستند. ترجمهی خوب و روانی هم داره واقعاً.
December 26, 2017
کتابی نبود ک توجه ام رو جلب کنه
October 26, 2025
My first read of 2025 and it has been a complete game changer in terms of my perception of the study of history. Finishing this book felt like saying goodbye to a friend who now has to leave you and go back to their town after their short visit. I have taken a backseat with trying to stick to a goodreads reading challenge this year which meant I read this book over the course of 6 months, also because I have been quite busy with my readings for academia. Ever since I could remember history as a subject in school, I have unfortunately associated it with the routine of memorising dates, events and people's names. I couldn't much see beyond it which is what I wanted to overcome when I picked this book. I also have never done well with introduction books, they tend to get quite boring and juvenile so this was also something I was very unsure of when starting the book. It is not easy to do what John H. Arnold has accomplished with introducing historiography to a beginner audience. When he mentions the pleasure in studying the past as compared to studying the stars by the end of the book, it touched upon something I found myself thinking about throughout the book which was that studying cosmology is in fact quite similar to studying our past. We look back on so many things as humans with the passage of time, be it the cosmic history or the history of our people. This book also changed how I view the history of all the places I have lived in and I know for a fact that I will be revisiting the feeling of how this book made me perceive the world for a long time.
November 1, 2025
“History is an argument, and arguments present the opportunity for change. When presented with some dogmatists claiming that ‘this is the only course of action’ or ‘this is how things have always been’, history allows us to demur, to point out that there have always been many courses of action and many ways of being. History provides us with the tools to dissent.”
Displaying 1 - 30 of 241 reviews