Historiography is the study of how history has been written — the history of historical argument. It asks: who has interpreted this event, what did they argue, why did they argue it, and what has changed since? It is not the same as history. History is the study of what happened in the past. Historiography is the study of how historians have tried to explain what happened, why those explanations differ, and what the disagreements reveal about both the past and the people writing about it.
Why historians disagree
Historians disagree because historical interpretation is genuinely difficult, and because interpretations are shaped by factors that go beyond the available evidence. Three of the most important:
- New evidence. Archives open, documents are declassified, previously suppressed testimony becomes available. Robert Conquest’s estimates of StalinStalin Joseph Vissarionovich Stalin (18 December 1878 – 5 March 1953) was a Soviet politician, dictator and revolutionary who led the Soviet Union from 1924 until his death in 1953. Read More’s death toll, written before Soviet archives opened, were revised upward when the archives became available in the 1990s. New evidence forces new interpretations.
- Changing questions. Each generation asks different questions of the past. Social historians of the 1960s and 1970s asked about ordinary people, class, and material conditions — questions that earlier political historians had largely ignored. E.P. Thompson’s The Making of the English Working Class (1963) did not just find new answers; it asked new questions. The historiography of the Holocaust shifted in the 1990s from a focus on Hitler’s intentions to a focus on the perpetrators — ordinary people who killed — because the questions changed.
- Political and ideological context. Historians write from within their own time. Cold War American historians tended to produce orthodox accounts of Cold War origins that blamed Soviet aggression; revisionist historians of the 1960s, writing amid Vietnam-era disillusionment with American foreign policy, produced very different accounts of the same events. This does not make history merely political propaganda, but it does mean that interpretation is never completely neutral.
Schools of interpretation
When several historians share key assumptions, methods, or conclusions, they are sometimes grouped into a ‘school’ of interpretation. Intentionalists and Functionalists in Nazi historiography, Orthodox and Revisionist historians of Cold War origins, Whig historians of British constitutional development — these labels are analytical tools, not rigid categories. Individual historians often complicate or straddle the groupings. But the categories help you map the debate: to see where the main lines of disagreement are, who is arguing against whom, and what is actually at stake.
What historiography is not
Historiography is not a list of what historians have said. Listing Intentionalists and Functionalists and summarising their views is not historiographical engagement — it is description. Historiographical analysis requires you to do something with those views: to assess their relative strengths, consider what evidence supports or undermines them, and reach a conclusion about which interpretation is most persuasive, and why.
Historiography is also not the same as using historians as evidence. Quoting a historian to support a factual claim (‘Hobsbawm estimates that…’) is different from engaging with a historian’s interpretive argument (‘Hobsbawm’s argument that the short twentieth century ended in 1991 is persuasive because… but limited in that…’). The second is what AO3 is asking for.
Why it matters for your exam
At A-level, historiography is not a bolt-on extra. It is built into the assessment objectives of every major board. AO3 — the ability to analyse and evaluate interpretations — is worth between 20% and 40% of marks depending on the board and question type. Students who treat historians as decoration perform significantly worse on AO3 questions than students who understand that the debate is the content.
The 20th Century Interpretations reference section maps the major debates in detail. This section teaches you what to do with that knowledge in an answer.
← Back to Using Historiography · How to Use Interpretations →
