Apologie pour l'histoire, ou Métier d'historien¶
Bloch, M. (1949). Apologie pour l'histoire, ou Métier d'historien. The Historian's Craft.
Cited by¶
3 citations across 3 artifacts.
Each citation links to the sentence it supports in the citing article.
Primes¶
- Comparative Method
- Marc Bloch's methodological treatise Apologie pour l'histoire (1949, published in English as The Historian's Craft) insisted that historians name their comparative procedures and defend them against the charge that comparison across radically different historical contexts is inevitably anachronistic or reductive.
This sourceAnnales-school reflection on historical method; insists the historian name and defend comparative procedures against the charge of anachronism — supports the Clarity claim. (Citation-fix: the prior annotation described source criticism of witness testimony, a copy-paste leftover not matching this marker's claim.)
- Marc Bloch's methodological treatise Apologie pour l'histoire (1949, published in English as The Historian's Craft) insisted that historians name their comparative procedures and defend them against the charge that comparison across radically different historical contexts is inevitably anachronistic or reductive.
- Historical Empathy
- The structural pattern parallels what Bloch (1949) calls the historian's craft of judging past actions by what evidence shows was knowable at the time: a new engineering lead reviewing architectural decisions made five years ago finds several that look obviously wrong today.
This sourceClassic Annales-school treatment of source criticism: witness testimony must be interrogated at the point of utterance, never presumed truth-bearing.
- The structural pattern parallels what Bloch (1949) calls the historian's craft of judging past actions by what evidence shows was knowable at the time: a new engineering lead reviewing architectural decisions made five years ago finds several that look obviously wrong today.
- Primary vs. Secondary Sources
- The classification is not a reliability ranking — primary sources can be biased, partial, or fabricated, and secondary sources can be more reliable than any single primary source when they triangulate across many, a point Bloch (1949) makes in treating witness testimony as material to be interrogated at the point of utterance rather than presumed truth-bearing.
This sourceClassic Annales-school treatment of source criticism: witness testimony must be interrogated at the point of utterance, never presumed truth-bearing.
- The classification is not a reliability ranking — primary sources can be biased, partial, or fabricated, and secondary sources can be more reliable than any single primary source when they triangulate across many, a point Bloch (1949) makes in treating witness testimony as material to be interrogated at the point of utterance rather than presumed truth-bearing.
Verification¶
This reference passed the adversarial substantiation pipeline: it was checked to exist and to support the claim it is attached to. See how references were verified.
Registry ID ref:6d8789f62392 · see in the full table