Tips on how to study history

[patrick_mcmurray]

I am just about to start an undergraduate degree in history, and would appreciate any thoughts on how best to go about this, especially from those of us who have studied the subject at university.

I already have a degree in law, and so am specifically interested in points that apply to the study of history.

A couple that I have thought of are:
1. Read Roberts A History of the World for a good outline of the main events of whatever period it happens to be. And/ or obtain a good short book on the subject.
2. Maps could be very useful.

If you have any further thoughts I would be interested to hear them.

Thanks in advance.

Patrick

[pryor15]

Howard Zinn's A People's History of the United States is a great read. it's "slanted" in that it only tells the histories of minorities/the poor/the working class/etc, but it works very well as a counterpoint to traditional history, which is "written by the winners"

i also had a history prof who had us read certain novels from different time periods, as they can capture an age better than most history books.

[MrMon]

Adopt a Marxist perspective, you'll get on a lot easier. [img]/images/graemlins/frown.gif[/img]

I'm four weeks into my teacher education program, and if I have to read the word "hegemony" one more time, I'm going to knock the dialectic out of someone. How I long for the days of the merely liberal.

[Sadat X]

I second the Zinn book.

Also, you'll reach a point (probably rather quickly) where you don't want to read 50 pages of textbook every night. Don't. Textbooks are worthless, give 99% of your focus to lecture, your reader, and other reading materials.

Agree with the professor in your essays. If you do that, you can basically get away with any claims you want. If you don't, be prepared to submit a 12-page annotated bibliography to get the same grade.

[patrick_mcmurray]

[ QUOTE ]


Agree with the professor in your essays. If you do that, you can basically get away with any claims you want. If you don't, be prepared to submit a 12-page annotated bibliography to get the same grade.

[/ QUOTE ]

This seems like very sound advice. "Singing from the right hymn book", right?

[NT!]

Zinn is a good read but pretty dry. I don't take him as definitive. James Loewey's "Lies My Teacher Told Me" is in a similar vein and a bit more readable IMO.

I think with history it's really good to be an expert on a certain era at some point early on, especially a really pivotal one, like postwar Europe or something. Not just events, but the art and culture of the time, the living conditions, the music, everything. When you really see how a particular time period fits together and FEELS and affects those that follow it, it helps you look more critically at history in general and other time periods as you learn about them. If you get a chance to read a few books about a time period that really interests you - on your own - give it a whirl.

I studied Politics and Sociology, IMO both of these disciplines suffer when their practitioners fail to know their history, the same way historians do when they lack the ability to interpret political and social models and consequences. They're such broad disciplines.

[bobman0330]

The key thing you need to understand is that history is not the study of past events. History is the study of the causes of past events. Of course, you'll need to be familiar with the basic outline of events and the background, but don't mistake this for history. This is just the prerequisite for history. Whenever you read about something that happened (a battle, a war, the writing of a book, a change in people's attitude towards sex), as yourself, "Why did this happen? Why didn't something else happen?"

Be skeptical. History is a field where lots of people have an agenda. That's not to say they aren't good historians, but it's not a coincidence that a lot of people come up with historical results that agree with their prejudices.

But don't be too skeptical. Don't be afraid to use what someone else does right because they might be biased or wrong about other things. For example, don't be afraid of using a Marxist analysis of a problem that calls for it. Don't be afraid to use an old-school, untrendy approach if it's correct.

Don't write history like a lawyer. I'm in law school now, and I write law like history, which is also bad. As soon as you have the opportunity, find a good experience historical writer, sit him down with something historical you've written, and have him tell you how your approach is wrong.

You're right about maps. History happens on geography. If you try to understand the Great Northern War without understanding the Baltic Sea, you'll have a hard time.

Unless you're sure now what you want to study, diversify up front. Study the Cold War, but also study ancient Rome, medieval Japan, and 19th century Arabia. Different types of history have subtleties that are hard to appreciate without trying them.

Best of luck. You've obviously chosen the noblest of all majors, and I'm sure you'll enjoy it. Feel free to PM or ask me any specific questions I've failed to address

[patrick_mcmurray]

[ QUOTE ]


I think with history it's really good to be an expert on a certain era at some point early on, especially a really pivotal one, like postwar Europe or something. Not just events, but the art and culture of the time, the living conditions, the music, everything. When you really see how a particular time period fits together and FEELS and affects those that follow it, it helps you look more critically at history in general and other time periods as you learn about them. If you get a chance to read a few books about a time period that really interests you - on your own - give it a whirl.



[/ QUOTE ]

Yes, engagement with the culture of that time (as opposed to just the political machinations) seems v important.

[patrick_mcmurray]

[ QUOTE ]
The key thing you need to understand is that history is not the study of past events. History is the study of the causes of past events. Of course, you'll need to be familiar with the basic outline of events and the background, but don't mistake this for history. This is just the prerequisite for history. Whenever you read about something that happened (a battle, a war, the writing of a book, a change in people's attitude towards sex), as yourself, "Why did this happen? Why didn't something else happen?"

Don't write history like a lawyer. I'm in law school now, and I write law like history, which is also bad. As soon as you have the opportunity, find a good experience historical writer, sit him down with something historical you've written, and have him tell you how your approach is wrong.

Unless you're sure now what you want to study, diversify up front. Study the Cold War, but also study ancient Rome, medieval Japan, and 19th century Arabia. Different types of history have subtleties that are hard to appreciate without trying them.



[/ QUOTE ]

Thank-you for your post.

1. History for me is about the hows and the whys - but as you say, in order to engage with these you need to know at least a few whats!!
2. You will be pleased to hear that I have picked first year modules in both ancient history and "modern" history.
3. Great idea to pass on essays to people who have excelled at the subject.
4. Re legal style. My old law prof wrote beautifully. It seemed to me that he simply stated exactly what he thought. (Harder than it sounds as this requires crystal clear understanding of the subject matter!). Look for anything by FMB Reynolds. I believe that he is currently editor of the Law Quarterly Review (UK), and Bowstead and Reynolds on Agency.

[Rick Nebiolo]

[ QUOTE ]
2. Maps could be very useful.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm about 75% of the way through Shelby Foote's "The Civil War: A Narrative" and found the battle maps (and descriptions) in Wikipedia to be the best. Take for example The Battle of Gettysburg.

~ Rick