LAUSR

Marc Bloch, an influential and innovative French scholar of medieval history who researched and wrote during the first half of the 20th century, defined history as “the science of men in time” (Bloch, 1963, p. 27). As Bloch’s definition implies, historians approach research in much the same way that scientists do. They identify a line of inquiry. They pinpoint the population, locale, and era to be studied. Before beginning their research, they immerse themselves in the historiography— the books and articles that have been written about the topic. They also read what other historians have written about the salient features of the period and locale they plan to study, just as scientists do before they begin an investigation that will build on, or refute, another scientist’s findings. Of all the sciences, history is perhaps most like geology. The record to be examined, although incomplete, is available for study. Yet the investigator, whether historian or geologist, cannot rerun the series of events that produced the result now being studied. And, like geology, history is both contextand time bound. As Bloch noted of the historian’s craft, “The historian does not think of the human in the abstract. His thoughts breathe freely the air of the climate of time” (Bloch, 1963, p. 27). After reading the relevant historiography, historians formulate the questions to be answered about their chosen topic. The specific questions are particularly important. “Without questions of the right sort,” explains historian David Hackett Fischer, “empirical projects are consigned to failure before they are fairly begun” (Fischer, 1970, pp. 3-4). Then, rather than set up a fully equipped laboratory to conduct their painstakingly delineated project, as some scientists do, historians identify and then carefully examine primary sources—items created during the era under study—that contain the evidence that will help them fulfill the study’s aims. Relevant archives— the institutions where archivists catalog and safeguard primary sources—then become historians’ laboratories. Primary sources are the main tool used by historians as they develop answers to their questions (Tosh, 1991, pp. 32-34). A few examples of primary sources include letters; diaries; personal papers; the papers of businesses and organizations; government documents; newspaper, magazine, and professional journal articles; photographs; radio and television shows; films; and, more recently, emails and blog posts. Today, historians find the primary sources that are relevant to their project not only in libraries and archives but, increasingly, online (Trachtenberg, 2006, pp. 140-168, 228-248), although the authenticity of online sources must be carefully verified. Archivists and librarians are instrumental in helping historians identify the primary sources relevant to their project. Indeed, historians rely on archivists in particular to ensure that their search for primary sources is thorough. Depending on the project, archival research often entails extensive travel. Oral history, an interview with an informant about a past experience, can also be a valuable source. Oral history interviews are freely given, in-depth accounts of a personal experience grounded in a specific time, place, and circumstance. Historians carefully prepare for oral history interviews by learning about the topic to be discussed, identifying reliable informants, and formulating objective questions untainted by present-day views or pre-drawn conclusions (Oral History Association, 2009). Using primary sources, and perhaps oral histories, historians create secondary sources—articles and books written after the period under study that contain information, analyses, and conclusions about the chosen topic (Tosh, 1991, pp. 30-33). Secondary sources can be just as important to writing a comprehensive history as are primary sources. As already noted, historians begin a project by first reading the historiography—the secondary sources that other historians have already written, essentially the history of the history—of the topic they are about to investigate (Kramer, 1989; Trachtenberg, 2006, pp. 51-60, 199-214). Thus, historians draw upon and cite not only primary sources and oral histories but also secondary sources in their work. 757448 JHLXXX10.1177/0890334418757448Journal of Human LactationAbout Research research-article2018