The houses of history: A critical reader in history and theory, second edition

by Anna Green, Kathleen Troup

The houses of history is a clear, jargon-free introduction to the major theoretical approaches employed by historians. This innovative critical reader provides accessible introductions to fourteen schools of thought, from the empiricist to the postcolonial, including chapters on Marxist history, Freud and psychohistory, the Annales, historical sociology, narrative, gender and history of the emotions among others.
Each chapter begins with a succinct description of the ideas integral to a particular theory. The authors then explore the insights and controversies arising from the application of this model, drawing upon debates and examples from around the world. Each chapter concludes with a representative example from a historian writing within this conceptual framework.
This newly revised edition of the highly successful textbook is the ideal basis for an introductory course in history and theory for students of history at all levels.

Genres: History, Nonfiction, School, Theory, Academic, Grad School, Read For School

461 pages, Paperback

First published April 1, 1999

Reviews

[Teri · Rating 4 out of 5]

This book is a look at 12 theories/methods of historiography. The included chapters cover empiricism, Marxism, psychohistory, the Annales, historical sociology, quantitative history, anthropology/ethnohistory, historical narrative, oral history, gender history, postcolonial, and poststructuralism/postmodern history.

In the first section of each chapter, Green and Troup offer a short explanatory discourse on each theory/method, following with a short example. The book is at time dense with some theories described more clearly than others. Where most historical works utilize a combination of theories and methods, this book serves as a good framework for understanding foundational concepts in historiography. This book is generally utilized in post-graduate level history classes.

[Ryan · Rating 2 out of 5]

I read this for one of my grad school classes and it was VERY dense. While some of the information was interesting, the way it was presented just didn't work very well. A lot of passages seemed to ramble on about a topic that wasn't important or central to the subject of the chapter and often was very vague and missed the mark of actually coherently explaining the main purposes behind a certain theory and how it was utilized.

[Andrew Fischer · Rating 3 out of 5]

Textbook example of “welcome to grad school, read this book you have a week”, but definitely brought up some interesting points on the ways in which historiography is approached

[Phoenix · Rating 4 out of 5]

How To Analyze It!

Targeted to a course in historiography, “Houses of History” discusses 12 different approaches to presenting and analyzing historical events. My own interest in this kind of a book was sparked back in high school by The Pooh Perplex, a humorous look at literary analysis styles from Marxism to literary snobbery to English Romanticism. Grasping the essential patterns of a style is like mastering different techniques of dance or a craft – the overview allows one to embrace and appreciate each, either as a spectator or as a performer.

Each selection is divided into two parts. The first is an overview by the authors the style is about with a few questions at the end to stimulate discussion. The second part is an example essay by a professional historian who employs that style. While the first part comes with footnotes and referenced, the sample essays do not, which IMV is a drawback.

While the overviews were uniformly quite good I had problems with some of the readings. E. P. Thompson's piece “Exploitation” on the status of tradesmen in the English industrial revolution had some elements of the Marxism it was supposed to illustrate but seemed to owe more to the unseen hand of Adam Smith. Richard Wall's essay on the composition of British Households since 1650 certainly did illustrate Quantitative Historical Methods but was so suitably boring in it's use of limited statistics that anyone unfamiliar with the approach would henceforth wish to ignore it. Henrietta Whiteman's post colonial exposition illustrated the emic bias of the genre. While directly contrasting European empiricism with indigenous narratives, the latter came off as cloyingly romanticized, and the choice of a self-interview rather than a 3rd person exposition of multiple sources put this more into a category of oral history. Finally Walkowitz's “Science and the Seance” fits the style of a newspaper article with its meandering descriptive detail. The appropriateness of the story of Mrs Weldon, a Victorian era spiritualist who's estranged husband tried to commit her to a lunatic asylum would fit better into a post structural framework if she were to tie this to Michel Foucault's analysis of the label of madness as a means to control fringe members of society.

On the other hand I was blown away by Hayden White's “The Fictions of Factual Representation”. White is someone who I've had on my list to read for some time. I found his equivalencing of historical analysis to fictional rhetoric disturbing yet seductive. Braudel's essay from The Mediterranean and the Mediterranean World in the Age of Philip II and his concept of 3 levels of time reflected in the social influences of mountain regions was impressive. Braudel is considered the founder of the Annales view of history and this is certainly an apt choice. Inga Clendinnen's discussion of the disintegration of 16th century Yucatan society came in the wake of the Spanish conquest, especially concerning women, was fascinating showing off the Ethno-Anthropologic approach admirably. Erik Erikson's analysis of Hitler's appeal to the German population not as a substitute father figure but as an overgrown adolescent older brother provided an excellent appeal for a Psycho historical perspective.

The examples of the remaining 4 chapters on Empirical, Sociological, the value and problems of collecting Oral Histories and the dimension of Gender in history were fair and reasonable representations.

Though long past university age I found the book useful in clarifying some matters, and more useful in fuzzifying others. Allowing for the substitution of the less recommendable readings this could be the basis of a really interesting seminar based or online course.

[Alexandria · Rating 3 out of 5]

Having a work like this is immensely helpful as a backbone for a historiography class. However, I do not think this book accomplishes its task as well as it could.

Green and Troup author each chapter covering a different historiographical field or question themselves, and follow each chapter with an article corresponding to said chapter's subject. It would have been better had this been a more complete anthology, with various experts in appropriate subjects authoring the chapters appropriate to their academic specialties. This would have prevented the inevitable problem of Green and Troup writing a chapter on a field or subject that they are not themselves intimately familiar with (this is particularly clear in the chapters on Marx and post-structuralism).

That said, for what it is, it gets the job done.

[Dylan Katthagen]

'The Houses of History' demonstrates that while historians are often suspicious of interdisciplinary analyses and applications, these are nonetheless intrinsic to historical inquiry. According to authors and associate professors Anna Green and Kathleen Troup, the most popular modes of historiographic integration are: empirical, Marxist, psychoanalytic, archival, social, quantitative, ethnocentric, fictive, gendered, poststructural, postcolonial, public, oral and emotional. Though limited in scope, the theoretical frameworks produce insightful and controversial ways of illustrating past phenomena.

History is difficult to pin down. The challenge to organise complicated sources without eliminating diverse perspectives can often discourage the historian from investigating past identities, events and developments. However, this book shows that integrating various schools and methodologies with an understanding of contextual influences and subjectivities typically breeds enhanced portraits of the past.

[Ava · Rating 4 out of 5]

Read this in my historiography class in preparation for my senior capstone project. Required to read each chapter and everyone was assigned a different chapter throughout the semester to teach the class. The 12 houses of history was really interesting, but sometimes ventured into a more philosophical sphere of thinking that myself and the other history majors in the room were not familiar with. The last 3 years taught us that there is an objective history, but when you actually study the construction of history as a discipline, it does get a lot more nuanced. I enjoyed this book, i found a lot of the chapters interesting, especially the one on ethnohistory. Created a lot of interesting class discussions as well.

[Elizabeth Vilchis · Rating 3 out of 5]

This is great for learning historiographical approaches. I found it lacking in Indigenous perspectives and considerations. I also found discrepancies in some of the referencing and citing—as far as relevancy and orthodoxy goes. For instance, some of the citations were pulled from collective works and sort of pieced into wider arguments to make a point, instead of in a supplementary way. It’s a good beginner introduction to the concepts, but not a comprehensive one for those looking to get into the discipline.

[Simon · Rating 2 out of 5]

Technically didn't get through like 5 chapters, but I've been looking forward to giving this 2 stars for weeks and I'm not going to give up now.

+2 stars for containing some moderately interesting information that sort of helped me think about history in new, exciting ways
-3 stars for being a boring textbook

Arguably that math adds up to -1 stars and not 2, but hey, I'm a history student; math is hard.

[Katie Beene · Rating 4 out of 5]

A great overview of the different types of theory used in historical research. If you need a basic understanding of each group to help ground the more difficult/philosophical text that you are studying, this book gives great insight.

[Kavya · Rating 3 out of 5]

Some chapters were better than others.

[ياسمين]

Compared to other theory books this was easy to get through.

[Ellen Bobellen]

i cried over two chapters of this book. i love academia

[Juan Molina · Rating 3 out of 5]

Read for one of my grad classes; does a pretty good job of providing overviews of the different subdisciplines of history. Not the most thrilling read, though.

[Erika]

Not perfect, but I did like the use of specific articles to highlight methodological schools and will probably use for grad historiography classes again.

[Adina · Rating 4 out of 5]

Good text for graduate level theory class. I especially appreciated the international context.

[Olivia · Rating 3 out of 5]

the history of history

[Campbell Geary]

Read for class

[Ella Missen]

thankyou anna and kathleen, i loved this

[Emma Adair · Rating 2 out of 5]

hot garbage

[Joleen · Rating 3 out of 5]

A sampler platter of historiography schools—useful if you’re in the academic trenches, drier than day-old toast if you’re not. I bookmarked the feminist and post-colonial chapters for future reference.

[Jakob · Rating 3 out of 5]

For a acedemic book on how history is done, it is quite interesting. It provides many great examples to accompany the types of history jt mentions. Would never read for fun due to its nature, however, its content is great, especially for aspiring historians looking at how history "is practiced" in writing.

[Annemarie Plenert · Rating 5 out of 5]

Possibly the best comprehensive textbook I’ve ever used. Nuanced, in-depth, well-structured, and interesting. I found it useful and fascinating.

[Andrew · Rating 2 out of 5]

For a book so thick, it has surprisingly little to say. Each chapter of this book has a small introduction into a particular way of writing history followed by a long exert from a book that adheres to that style of history. The examples are often far too long and the explanations far too short. At times you walk away wondering if you actually gathered anything about that style of history. It would be much better if the first section was more rigorous.

[محمدرضا · Rating 4 out of 5]

کتاب خانه‌های تاریخ: خوانشی انتقادی از تاریخ و نظریه در قرن بیستم، نوشته آنا گرین و کاتلین تروپ، ترجمه بهزاد کریمی، نشر مرکز. ۱۴۰۰
The House of History, A Critical Reader in Twentieth-century History and Theory. Anna Green & Kathleen Troup. 2016
کتاب بر اساس درس «نظریه و تاریخ» بر می گردد که نویسندگان تدریس می کردند. آنها بر مکاتبی تمرکز کرده اند که در سده بیستم بیشترین تاثیر را بر حرفه تاریخ گذاشته اند. هر یک از فصول، جدای از منابع، بخش گزیده آثار دارد که طیف از کلاسیک ها تا آثار متاخر را در بر می گیرد،‌که البته دوره های زمانی تاریخی و مناطق جغرافیایی مختلف را در بر میگیرد.
فصول کتاب
- تجربه گرایان
o انگلستان عصر توده‌ها. جی. آر. التون
- مورخان مارکسیست
o استثمار. ای. پی. تامسپسون
- فروید و روان‌تاریخ
o افسانه کودکی هیتلر. اریک اریکسون
- مکتب آنال
o مدیترانه و جهان مدیترانه‌ای در عصر فیلیپ دوم. فرنان برودل
- جامعه‌شناسی تاریخی
o فرانسه،‌روسیه، چین: تحلیلی ساختاری از انقلاب‌های اجتماعی. ثدا اسکاچپول
- تاریخ کمی
o خانواده: تغییر جمعیت‌شناختی و اقتصادی در انگلستان، ۱۶۵۰-۱۹۷۰. ریچارد وال
- انسان شناسی و قوم‌مورخان
o زنان یوکوتانی مایا و فتوحات اسپانیا:‌ نقش و آئین در بازسازی تاریخی. اینگا کلندینن
- مساله روایت
o افسانه بازنمایی واقعی. هایدن وایت
- تاریخ شفاهی
o خاطرات انزاک:‌ آزمون نظریه خاطره مردمی در استرالیا. آلیستر تامسون
- جنسیت و تاریخ
o تقسیم‌بندی جنسیتی و شکل‌گیری طبقه در طبقه متوسط بیرمنگام، ۱۷۸۰-۱۸۵۰. کاترین هال
- چشم‌اندازهای پسااستعماری
o زنِ بوفالو سفید. هنریتا وایتمن
- چالش پساساختارگرایی/پست‌مدرنیسم
o علم و جلسه احضار ارواح: سرپیچی از جنسیت و ژانر. جودیث آر. والکوویتز

[Mike Emett · Rating 2 out of 5]

Not quite as 'clear and jargon-free' as advertized but just may be because the authors are from New Zealand and copy the British model for writing about history and such, whereas I, an American, am used to a different format. I found the examples located in the second half of each chapter more interesting (except for like two of them) then the first halves that deal with the history and pros/cons and such of each different method or theory in the world of historical research.

Although I am a historian and graduate student, I really just don't care about Methodology (oh no, how dare I and blah blah blah) or all the theories, especially the Marxist and postmodern/poststructural ones or the like. I really just do not care, yet I HAVE to study it and read about it as part of the history program.

If you are into this sort of thing, this book is for you.

[Terri Lynn · Rating 4 out of 5]

This was pretty good. I had to read it for a graduate independent seminar in graduate historiography. Each of the "houses" are different approaches historians take to research and write about history. Frankly, I think we need to use all of them because just focusing on history through one method causes a lot of history to be ignored and left out. For example, the "house" of diplomatic history focuses on official documents, treaties, and diplomatic affairs between two countries which only covers official documents and this is too limiting as it leaves out everything else. Whatever happens within a country that doesn't involve diplomacy between that country and another country is just not bothered with.

[Jennifer · Rating 4 out of 5]

The way history is primarily taught at the undergraduate level leaves out discussion of different historiographical schools. Students learn facts, read textbooks, in more advanced courses they deal with different scholarship, but rarely discuss what type of history the author proscribes to, unless he or she is a Marxist historian. For some reason that is mentioned more often than others. But the field of history is vast and its practitioners varied. This book serves as a useful introduction to readers looking for a more advanced understanding of history as a discipline.

[Liam · Rating 3 out of 5]

On occasion the introductions would leave me confused towards the meanings and methodology of each school of history, and this would be remedied within reading a single page of the corresponding sample chapter. This is not good for a book which claims to be 'clear' and 'jargon' free. However the sample chapters were chosen well and of the introductions which were clear, they explained the school of history adequately. The annales school section was a personal highlight.

[Manuel Martins · Rating 1 out of 5]

Not as clear as it advertises, the theoretical framework of each chapter is, quite frankly, weak (with a special emphasis on the Marxist chapter, which introduces key-concepts of Marxist philosophy that are never properly explained (productive forces, means of production, mode of production or relations if production, i. e.).

Not that good if you’re a History student trying to learn more about theory independently.