This article is about the academic discipline.

For a general history of human beings,

see Human history. For a general history of Earth, see History of Earth. For other
uses, see History (disambiguation).

Part of a series on

History

 Index
 Outline
 Glossary

Key concepts









Periods





By region













 

Notable historians






















Timelines






 History portal
 Category

 v
 t
 e

History is the systematic study of the past, focusing primarily on the human past. As
an academic discipline, it analyses and interprets evidence to
construct narratives about what happened and explain why it happened. Some
theorists categorize history as a social science, while others see it as part of
the humanities or consider it a hybrid discipline. Similar debates surround the
purpose of history—for example, whether its main aim is theoretical, to uncover
the truth, or practical, to learn lessons from the past. In a more general sense, the
term history refers not to an academic field but to the past itself, times in the past, or
to individual texts about the past.

Historical research relies on primary and secondary sources to reconstruct past

events and validate interpretations. Source criticism is used to evaluate these
sources, assessing their authenticity, content, and reliability. Historians strive to
integrate the perspectives of several sources to develop a coherent narrative.
Different schools of thought, such as positivism, the Annales school, Marxism,
and postmodernism, have distinct methodological approaches.

History is a broad discipline encompassing many branches. Some focus on

specific time periods, such as ancient history, while others concentrate on
particular geographic regions, such as the history of Africa. Thematic categorizations
include political history, military history, social history, and economic history.
Branches associated with specific research methods and sources
include quantitative history, comparative history, and oral history.

History emerged as a field of inquiry in antiquity to replace myth-infused narratives,

with influential early traditions originating in Greece, China, and later in the Islamic
world. Historical writing evolved throughout the ages and became increasingly
professional, particularly during the 19th century, when a rigorous methodology and
various academic institutions were established. History is related to many fields,
including historiography, philosophy, education, and politics.

Definition
As an academic discipline, history is the study of the past with the main focus on the
human past.[1] It conceptualizes and describes what happened by collecting and
analysing evidence to construct narratives. These narratives cover not only how
events developed over time but also why they happened and in which contexts,
providing an explanation of relevant background conditions and causal mechanisms.
History further examines the meaning of historical events and the underlying human
motives driving them.[2]

In a slightly different sense, history refers to the past events themselves. Under this
interpretation, history is what happened rather than the academic field studying what
happened. When used as a countable noun, a history is a representation of the past
in the form of a history text. History texts are cultural products involving
active interpretation and reconstruction. The narratives presented in them can
change as historians discover new evidence or reinterpret already-known sources.
The past itself, by contrast, is static and unchangeable.[3] Some historians focus on
the interpretative and explanatory aspects to distinguish histories from chronicles,
arguing that chronicles only catalogue events in chronological order, whereas
histories aim at a comprehensive understanding of their causes, contexts, and
consequences.[4][a]

History has been primarily concerned with written documents. It focused on recorded
history since the invention of writing, leaving prehistory[b] to other fields, such
as archaeology.[7] Its scope broadened in the 20th century as historians became
interested in the human past before the invention of writing.[8][c]
Historians debate whether history is a social science or forms part of the humanities.
Like social scientists, historians formulate hypotheses, gather objective evidence,
and present arguments based on this evidence. At the same time, history aligns
closely with the humanities because of its reliance on subjective aspects associated
with interpretation, storytelling, human experience, and cultural heritage.[10] Some
historians strongly support one or the other classification while others characterize
history as a hybrid discipline that does not belong to one category at the exclusion of
the other.[11] History contrasts with pseudohistory, a label used to describe practices
that deviate from historiographical standards by relying on disputed historical
evidence, selectively ignoring genuine evidence, or using other means to distort the
historical record. Often motivated by specific ideological agendas, pseudohistorical
practices mimic historical methodology to promote biased, misleading narratives that
lack rigorous analysis and scholarly consensus.[12]

Purpose
Various suggestions about the purpose or value of history have been made. Some
historians propose that its primary function is the pure discovery of truth about the
past. This view emphasizes that the disinterested pursuit of truth is an end in itself,
while external purposes, associated with ideology or politics, threaten to undermine
the accuracy of historical research by distorting the past. In this role, history also
challenges traditional myths lacking factual support.[13][d]

A different perspective suggests that the main value of history lies in the lessons it
teaches for the present. This view is based on the idea that an understanding of the
past can guide decision-making, for example, to avoid repeating previous
mistakes.[15] A related perspective focuses on a general understanding of the human
condition, making people aware of the diversity of human behaviour across different
contexts—similar to what one can learn by visiting foreign countries.[16] History can
also foster social cohesion by providing people with a collective identity through a
shared past, helping to preserve and cultivate cultural heritage and values across
generations.[17] For some scholars, including Whig historians and the Marxist
scholar E. H. Carr, history is a key to understanding the present[18] and, in Carr's
case, shaping the future.[19]

History has sometimes been used for political or ideological purposes, for instance,
to justify the status quo by emphasising the respectability of certain traditions or to
promote change by highlighting past injustices.[20] In extreme forms, evidence is
intentionally ignored or misinterpreted to construct misleading narratives, which can
result in pseudohistory or historical denialism.[12][e] Influential examples are Holocaust
denial, Armenian genocide denial, Nanjing Massacre denial, and Holodomor
denial.[22]

Etymology
 Fragment of the Histories by Herodotus, an Ancient
Greek historical text [23]

The word history comes from the Ancient Greek term ἵστωρ (histōr),
meaning 'learned, wise man'. It gave rise to the Ancient Greek
word ἱστορία (historiā), which had a wide meaning associated with inquiry in general
and giving testimony. The term was later adopted into Classical Latin as historia.
In Hellenistic and Roman times, the meaning of the term shifted, placing more
emphasis on narrative aspects and the art of presentation rather than focusing on
investigation and testimony.[24]

The word entered Middle English in the 14th century via the Old
French term histoire.[25] At this time, it meant 'story, tale', encompassing both factual
and fictional narratives. In the 15th century, its meaning shifted to cover the branch
of knowledge studying the past in addition to narratives about the past.[26] In the 18th
and 19th centuries, the word history became more closely associated with factual
accounts and evidence-based inquiry, coinciding with the professionalization of
historical inquiry, a meaning still dominant in contemporary usage.[27] The dual
meaning, referring to both mere stories and factual accounts of the past, is present in
the terms for history in many other European languages. They include the
French histoire, the Italian storia, and the German Geschichte.[28]

Methods
Main article: Historical method
The historical method is a set of techniques historians use to research and interpret
the past, covering the processes of collecting, evaluating, and synthesizing
evidence.[f] It seeks to ensure scholarly rigour, accuracy, and reliability in how
historical evidence is chosen, analysed, and interpreted.[30] Historical research often
starts with a research question to define the scope of the inquiry. Some research
questions focus on a simple description of what happened. Others aim to explain
why a particular event occurred, refute an existing theory, or confirm a new
hypothesis.[31]

Sources and source criticism

To answer research questions, historians rely on various types of evidence to
reconstruct the past and support their conclusions. Historical evidence is usually
divided into primary and secondary sources.[32] A primary source is a source that
originated during the period that is studied. Primary sources can take various forms,
such as official documents, letters, diaries, eyewitness accounts, photographs, and
audio or video recordings. They also include historical remains examined
in archaeology, geology, and the medical sciences, such as artefacts
and fossils unearthed from excavations. Primary sources offer the most direct
evidence of historical events.[33]

Archives preserve large quantities of original sources

for researchers to access.[34]
A secondary source is a source that analyses or interprets information found in other
sources.[35] Whether a document is a primary or a secondary source depends not
only on the document itself but also on the purpose for which it is used. For example,
if a historian writes a text about slavery based on an analysis of historical
documents, then the text is a secondary source on slavery and a primary source on
the historian's opinion.[36][g] Consistency with available sources is one of the main
standards of historical works. For instance, the discovery of new sources may lead
historians to revise or dismiss previously accepted narratives.[38] To find and access
primary and secondary sources, historians consult archives, libraries, and museums.
Archives play a central role by preserving countless original sources and making
them available to researchers in a systematic and accessible manner. Thanks to
technological advances, historians increasingly rely on online resources, which offer
vast digital databases with methods to search and access specific documents.[39]

Source criticism is the process of analysing and evaluating the information a source
provides.[h] Typically, this process begins with external criticism, which evaluates the
authenticity of a source. It addresses the questions of when and where the source
was created and seeks to identify the author, understand their reasons for producing
the source, and determine if it has undergone some type of modification since its
creation. Additionally, the process involves distinguishing between original works,
copies, and deceptive forgeries.[41]

Internal criticism evaluates the content of a source, typically beginning with the
clarification of the meaning within the source. This involves disambiguating individual
terms that could be misunderstood but may also require a general translation if the
source is written in an unfamiliar language.[i] Once the information content of a
source is understood, internal criticism is specifically interested in determining
accuracy. Critics ask whether the information is reliable or misrepresents the topic
and further question whether the source is comprehensive or omits important details.
One way to make these assessments is to evaluate whether the author was able, in
principle, to provide a faithful presentation of the studied event. Other approaches
include the assessment of the influences of the author's intentions and prejudices,
and cross-referencing information with other credible sources. Being aware of the
inadequacies of a source helps historians decide whether and which aspects of it to
trust, and how to use it to construct a narrative.[43]

Synthesis and schools of thought

The selection, analysis, and criticism of sources result in the validation of a large
collection of mostly isolated statements about the past. As a next step, sometimes
termed historical synthesis, historians examine how the individual pieces of evidence
fit together to form part of a larger story.[j] Constructing this broader perspective is
crucial for a comprehensive understanding of the topic as a whole. It is a creative
aspect[k] of historical writing that reconstructs, interprets, and explains what
happened by showing how different events are connected.[46] In this way, historians
address not only which events occurred but also why they occurred and what
consequences they had.[47] While there are no universally accepted techniques for
this synthesis, historians rely on various interpretative tools and approaches in this
process.[48]

Auguste Comte articulated positivism, advocating a

science-based approach to history.[49]
One tool to provide an accessible overview of complex developments is the use
of periodization, which divides a timeframe into different periods, each organized
around central themes or developments that shaped the period. For example,
the three-age system is traditionally used to divide early human history into Stone
Age, Bronze Age, and Iron Age based on the predominant materials and
technologies during these periods.[50] Another methodological tool is the examination
of silences, gaps or omissions in the historical record of events that occurred but did
not leave significant evidential traces. Silences can happen when contemporaries
find information too obvious to document but may also occur if there are specific
reasons to withhold or destroy information.[51][l] Conversely, when large datasets are
available, quantitative approaches can be used. For instance, economic and social
historians commonly employ statistical analysis to identify patterns and trends
associated with large groups.[54]