Read Like a Historian: A Guide

Back when I started my grad school career, I knew we’d do a lot of reading, but I never fathomed how much reading we’d do. From my Master’s up through my Ph.D. I was often reading 2-3 books a week on a slow week. Nearing the end of my tenure in grad school came the vaunted comprehensives, where we were expected to read dozens of books on different areas of history (European History 1200-1700, European History 1700-present, American History 1700-1860s, etc.)

This is supposed to give you the expertise in these areas of study, along with your coursework, to bolster your future research, teaching curricula, and anything else you’d need it for. That means reading, reading, and reading some more.

Regardless of who you are, whether you’re Superman, Teddy Roosevelt (who allegedly read several books a day before having his breakfast), or just a voracious reader, nobody can realistically burn through that many books cover to cover in a week.

Very quickly, I had to get over my insecurities surrounding reading. Before grad school, I lived by this creed that I had to read every single word on every single page, and if I didn’t, anxiety would creep up. I learned real fast that wasn’t a viable way to read anymore. I had to learn a new way to read, reading for a purpose.

Now, if you love poring over every word and want to digest each sentence down to its punctuation, go for it! There are still many books I read to enjoy the writing, the style, the prose, and anything else, but I also read a ton of books now using the stuff I picked up in grad school.

This newsletter isn’t a play-by-play as to how you should read every book, but it’s a guide as to how we were expected to read books for grad school, and it’s a technique that is very much applicable to researching and studying history.

How Do You Read Like a Historian?

Purpose! I’ll say it again, purpose! That is everything in reading, especially for someone who wants to get the most out of reading while reading quickly.

Before you read, you should come up with a clear purpose for why you’re doing it. For example, I have recently been researching Civil War General Irvin McDowell, a figure who has been forgotten in the post-war years. He commanded the Union Army’s largest force in the first major battle, the First Bull Run. I picked up a book on the battle to understand McDowell’s command decisions and anything else related to him and the action. There were hundreds of pages covering Confederate generals, Union generals, unit actions, eyewitness accounts, etc. I could have buckled down and read the thing over the course of a week, but that’s not why I was reading the book. Finding things out about McDowell and anyone who clashed with him took me a couple of hours. Why? Because I had a purpose.

Reading like a historian means reading with a purpose.

Now, grad school taught me a ton! It taught me how to properly research and think about history, but most of all it taught me how to read for the sake of studying history.

Each book your assigned carries the same expectations. There was a list of questions each student was expected to use as a guideline. This is the basic format they wanted to know for every grad school class.

1. What are the author’s credentials, or are they an authoritative source?

2. What historical questions are being asked, or what is the historical problem?

3. What is the author’s thesis?

4. What was their research methodology?

5. What type of history is this?

6. What primary sources did they use?

7. What secondary sources did they use?

8. How does this fit into the historiography?

9. What questions does this raise for you? (So important if you want to be an active reader)

10. Are you convinced of the author’s argument?

That’s it.

It sounds simple, right? (Don’t worry, I’ll break them down) It isn’t always as simple as it sounds, but it’s a lot less complex than trying to grind it out, reading each word, getting bogged down, and getting little reading done.

This list is your purpose!

Now, let’s break it down:

1. Author’s credentials or background: Not every historian or author needs a PhD in history. This is just a good way to judge whether or not they should be used as a source for informing the historiography of the topic. Historiography, which I will explain further down below, is basically the history of history. How have different authors approached the subject, what were their conclusions, etc.?

So, the author of the book may have already written several books on the topic, and they’re a great authoritative source. Or, maybe they’ve taught about it for years. Or, maybe it’s their first book, but they used a great deal of secondary sources, the historiography, and primary sources to come to their conclusion.

Sometimes, you have to wonder if a source is authoritative. If someone is churning out ChatGPT books on Gumroad or Amazon, they’re likely not a very authoritative source. Or, if an author just reads a few secondary sources, digests them, and writes an overview of the conversation, that’s not very authoritative.

2. What are the historical questions?

This can be for either an entire book, one chapter, or one article. Books have an overarching historical question being asked, but authors use each chapter to inform the conclusion. That means each book and chapter has its own historical question.

What is a historical question?

It’s the entire basis for writing the book. For most professional historians, the question should be formatted as a why question. Who, what, when, and where are good for getting an idea of the topic, but really digging deep involves a why. Examples: Why were the First Crusaders successful militarily? Why was Germany affected by the European Witch Craze? Why did the Japanese bomb Pearl Harbor? Why did the Japanese ultimately lose momentum and lose the war? Why did Hitler appeal to the people of Germany?

Those are a few examples. Authors will really get down into the nitty-gritty sometimes, picking nuanced topics: Why was the Civil War a great opportunity for American Medical Science? Why did the publications of books contribute heavily to the European Witch Craze? Why was the Southern dependence on cotton ultimately a bad strategy during the Civil War

This doesn’t mean you can’t ask other questions, but understanding the why is crucial to understanding history. Any historical question can be rerouted to become a why question.

Start there. Then, going through the book, ask yourself, what is the historical question being asked in this chapter? Each chapter will have its own question and thesis.

3. What is the thesis?

This is the entire basis for critiquing the book, article, or chapter!

I had a grad school professor who drilled into us that the answer should always start with because. Using my examples above: Why was Germany affected by the European Witch Craze? Because Germany was placed within the overarching religious strife between protestants and Catholics during a time of great economic, moral, and climatic stress.

That sounds like a mouthful, but that’s okay. Just make it shorter if you want to, but the thesis is the basis for understanding their argument. I know in elementary school you were told: “Never ever start a sentence with because!” But, in this classroom, it’s okay. I promise you won’t be docked for it.

It’s important to know where you should look for the question. For a book or article, it’s always in the intro. You shouldn’t be using an exact quote from the author either. I was embarrassed in front of my peers for doing this, and my professor made me an example of what not to do! You should be able to formulate it in your own words.

For book chapters, your thesis should come from reading the chapters. Best advice: read the first sentence of each chapter, skimming for topics that relate back to the historical questions. This will give you your thesis. Don’t obsess with the fluff making up most paragraphs, unless it’s evidence used to inform the thesis

4. What is the research methodology?

This is exactly what is sounds like. What historical approach did they take?

The research methodology first sets the parameters: what is the group or event to be studied, the time period, and the location of what you’re studying?

Example: If you’re doing an overarching study of those who fought on the Christian side in the First Crusade: First Crusaders, 1096-1099, Europe and the Holy Land.

Or, say you’re studying the Besiegers during the Siege of Antioch, October 1097- June 1098: First Crusaders and Byzantine Empire, 1097-1098, Antioch.

Next, we look at the analytical approach. Is this a:

• Linear or Chronological Study? Usually written in a narrative form.

• A Topical study? Different topics or issues, giving evidence or arguments to support a thesis. These could be topics covering political, social, or economic, people, families, military, events, etc.

• A Comparative Study? comparing linear or individual events. Comparing a before and after. This means topics, or events, separated by different times, places, ideas, etc.

• A Microhistory? A person, or individual, using their life experiences, characteristics, and life events to stand as a representation for their entire group. This tends to be lower classes, or less-studied groups, often sparsely covered due to a lack of primary sources.

• A Macrohistory? A study focused on a broad group or set of events. This tends to fall within the purview of economic or social history and makes use of statistics to learn a lot about a group. This has very little to do with individuals.

• A biographical history? Zeroes in on one major person or individual, who has ample primary source representation, written in a narrative.

These are some big examples of what we’d be expected to find while reading in grad school. Obviously, you don’t have to make a big deal about that, but it helps if you’re using sources to inform your ideas about the historiography of a topic.

You can base historical methodology on whether the sources and methods for conducting their research were ideal for answering their questions and proving their thesis.

Ask yourself: how did they conduct their research? Does this method work? Is it one I would use? How can we apply this research method to other topics?

Is this based on a qualitative analysis of primary sources? Did they use mainly secondary sources? Did they use a chronological history? Did they use enough primary source material? Etc.

Since we’re not in school, I’d recommend just looking at their methodology and asking whether it was a good way to prove their argument. Did they interpret their information from letters, Newspapers, diaries, or journals? Why did they choose the methodology they did, and does this work for the questions they asked?

5. What type of history is this?

This question is important for situating the work within the larger overarching topic. Types include: Economic, Military, Social, Cultural, Biographical, Quantitative, Religious. It can also include: Women’s History, African-American History, etc.

Here’s a basic list of topics, and this isn’t exhaustive by any means:

• Political

• Social

• Economic

• Religious

• Cultural

• Women’s

• Military

• Biography

If you’re reading a book on economics pertaining to the Civil War, that is an economic history of the war and should fall into the historiography of that category, as well as military history. Or, if you’re reading about the effect the European Witch Craze had on European women, that could be a cultural, social, and women’s historical study.

You can combine research types; most authors do!

6. What primary sources did they use?

Primary sources lead back to the subject you’re studying. They’re not an analysis, but the tools used to answer historical questions or problems.

These are original, first-hand resources that stand as evidence for researching past events.

This includes:

• Original documents: Diaries, journals, letters, newspapers, government records, military records, official government documents, memoirs, and many other options.

• Artifacts: Objects from the era, or event being studied that stand as physical evidence for research.

• Visual and Audio Media: Photos, film footage, oral histories, recordings, and art can fall under this type.

You don’t have to list every single primary source. Ask yourself which one is the most compelling, or ideal for answering their historical problems?

This is important for anyone looking to buckle down and build their expertise in a subject area. It will familiarize you with what primary sources are available.

To find this out: check footnotes, study the bibliography, or look for mentions of sources in the text.

Keep track of primary sources! I keep databases of this stuff on my computer, which I back up to an external hard drive. This can be an Excel spreadsheet, Google Doc, whatever, but keep up on these sources.

You can use numerous bibliographies to build up your lists. A few times, I have purchased books just for the bibliography. It hasn’t happened a lot, but it can be an incredible way to keep track of sources.

7. What secondary sources did they use?

These are historical works in which an author gives their analysis and editorializes, narrates, etc., based on primary sources and in response to other secondary sources.

Most books, articles, dissertations, and theses can be used in this category. Remember to look into the author’s credentials and make sure this could be seen as an authoritative source.

When you’re building your expertise in an area of history, you will start to see certain names mentioned more than others. Keep track of this! These names are central to fitting this into the historiography.

If an author directly mentions another secondary source or author, keep track of it. Check footnotes to see what sources they consistently refer to and if other authors use these sources/authors too.

8. How does this fit into the historiography?

Historiography is so important for interpreting history. What books, articles, chapters, etc have been written on this topic, what were their conclusions, and how did this change the study of this type of history, or topic?

For example, the causes of World War I have been one of the most debated topics in history. It first started off, really, with a book written by Fritz Fischer called Germany’s Aims in the First World War, published in 1961*.* Fischer blamed Germany for starting the war, basing it on some documents coming from German diplomats. This sparked a huge debate. Since then, we have books blaming Russia, Britain, all of Europe, different figures, different social and cultural events, etc. That’s the historiography.

The historiography is about how the “history” of this topic has changed over time. For our WWI example, Many reject Fischer’s thesis, basing it on the dozens of other books and articles published in the ensuing decades.

If you were to write an essay on the historiography of a topic, it would look like a debate and evolution over time. Follow the different pathways historians took, the different historical methods, topics, and more.

Ask yourself: What prior history, or research, is the author trying to respond to? What direction are they trying to push the history?

The historiography can lead you to new topics, different versions of old questions or problems, or it can lead you back to older arguments. If you know the historiography of your topic, then you have a great basis for reading or writing more about it.9.

9. What questions does this raise for you?

I can’t stress the importance of this enough! This is part of active reading and can send you down the path towards new research areas.

Try to think outside the box if you can, or connect your questions to other topics you’ve read about, or the work of different authors.

10. Are you convinced of their argument?

This is the point of the assessment. Does the author’s argument convince you? Why, or why not?

This is another part of active reading. When the author makes a definitive statement, use their sources and analysis to determine if it does, or doesn’t convince you.

Don’t forget to note the bibliographic information for the book your reading.

Write down the author’s name, title of the work, the publisher, and the year.

I would recommend, if you’re going to use this guide, that you keep these notes for future use. You can store them as a Google Doc, Word Doc, Notion Database, Obsidian notes, or any other way, but don’t just toss these out.

In fact, in the years following grad school, I still refer back to my old notes all the time.

This isn’t the only method you need for reading history, but it’s an important one.

This may sound like a lot to track, but when reading history, this will keep you actively engaged. You should never just be a passive passenger throughout a book, unless you’re reading it solely for pleasure.

There have been some history books I’ve read for pleasure. More popular books by authors like Erik Larson, David McCullough, Adam Makos, Laura Hillenbrand, and other well-known authors can be enjoyable. Even these writers make arguments at times, giving you notes or bibliographic references.

For a serious dive into history, building expertise, doing your own research and writing, and formulating arguments, you should be keeping track of all these.

Take note of the sources used, prominent experts, and authors, questions you can think of, how it fits in the wider historiography, and whether the evidence presented lines up with their thesis.

You will find yourself truly understanding these texts, changing the way you think while reading.

This isn’t the only reading or research advice I have to offer, but for now, this is a great place to start!

If you’re interested in finding historical sources, learning about historical research, or critically reading history books or sources, then follow along by joining my Substack.

My Substack newsletter is free, but please consider becoming a paid subscriber if you want to help me in my mission to teach others how to conduct historical research, read critically, and write about history.

We are losing a lot of our history. Not because sources are disappearing (actually, access to sources has never been easier), but because people aren’t taught the proper ways to research history. The passion for history is dwindling, but even worse, so is the general understanding of history as many are willing to passively accept what history they’ve been told. My goal is to change that.

History on a Whim is focused on teaching people how to study history, guiding them to research resources, teaching them how to properly question history, and becoming expert historians in an age where they’re needed now more than ever.

Please consider subscribing to my newsletter, or supporting my work through a paid subscription, or a one-time donation.

Check out my website www.historyonawhim.com, which is my hub for giving you research resources and help. It is a work-in-progress, but my lists of sources keep growing every day, and soon I will have: organized topic categories, thorough reading lists, educational articles, and guides to researching, writing, and reading about history.