THE UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS AT DALLAS

Graduate Program in the Humanities

HUHI 7399 Fall 2005

Sec. 034 Call = Jo 5.406

Professor Gerald Soliday Office: Jonsson 4.510

Hours: MW 10-10:45, M 6-7, and by appointment: 972-883-2670
E-mail: soliday@utdallas.edu Internet: ttp://www.utdallas.edu/~soliday
Please note that all e-mail correspondence related to the course must now
occur through a UTD e-mail address.

Humanities-History of Ideas 7399: HISTORICAL INQUIRY: A Gradute Tutorial

HUHI 7399 034 is an independent study course that serves graduate students with little
background in the field as an advanced introduction to historical study and the history of
ideas. It explores the nature and development of historical analysis as well as some of
the interpretive skills students should use to approach historical problems critically.

The course consists of readings and discussions addressing the general nature of
historical inquiry: its philosophical assumptions, the framing of problems or issues for
analysis, the use and abuse of evidence, and the limits and value of historical
knowledge.

Course requirements include (1) active participation in discussion of the readings [40%]
and (2) a ten- to twelve-page paper on historical interpretation [60%].

All written work and class discussions for this course are in gender-neutral,
nonsexist language and rhetorical constructions. Such practice is part of a
classroom situation according full respect and opportunity to all participants by all
others.

Written work is submitted in paper copy, without cover pages or special folders.
Simply put your name and course identification at the top of the first page and staple
the upper left corner. Papers are always paginated (at the bottom and center of
each page after the first), double-spaced, and presented in clear 10- to 12-point
type.

Parenthetical annotation is now strongly recommended, though any form of

annotation (foot- or endnotes) and bibliography is acceptable for this course,
provided that you use it correctly and consistently. Probably most appropriate for
your work in the arts and humanities are standard guides like Joseph Gibaldi’s MLA
Handbook for Writers of Research Papers (6th ed.; NY, 2003) or Kate L. Turabian’s
 Manual for Writers of Term Papers, Theses, and Dissertations (6th ed.; Chicago,
1996).

At the same time, Diana Hacker's Rules for Writers (5th ed.; Boston and NY, 2004)
summarizes MLA stylistic conventions, outlines current grammatical practices and
mechanical presentation, and offers helpful guidelines for researching and writing
papers. You may find it, her Research and Documentation in the Electronic Age (3rd
ed.; Boston, 2002), and her Web site (www.dianahacker.com) especially useful for
your work in the course this semester.

Any student who has not already read William Strunk Jr. and E. B. White, The
Elements of Style (4th ed.; Boston, 2000), should do so immediately.

I should also mention that the eleventh edition of Merriam-Webster’s Collegiate

Dictionary (Springfield, MA, 2003) is now the standard for everyday university work.

Most required readings as well as some recommended items for the course are on
reserve in the McDermott Library. Paperback books used extensively are also for sale, if
you wish to purchase them, both in the University Bookstore and at Off-Campus Books.
Rather than being on the library’s reserve shelf, however, shorter readings marked with
an asterisk (*) are available online through the copy of this syllabus on my Internet Web
site. Please note that those materials are under copyright, you must always cite them
properly, and you must have a password to gain access to them. I will give you the
password in class.

Please also note that, although I do not anticipate them, there may be some changes in
the following schedule. If they occur, I will announce them in class and post them on
the syllabus at my Web site on the Internet.

IMPORTANT NOTICE: all course correspondence by e-mail must now occur

through the student’s UTD e -mail address. UT-Dallas provides each student with a
free e-mail account that is to be used in all communication with university personnel.
This allows the university to maintain a high degree of confidence in the identity of all
individuals corresponding and the security of the transmitted information. The
Department of Information Resources at UTD provides a method for students to forward
email from other accounts to their UTD address and have their UTD mail sent on to
other accounts. Students may go to the following URL to establish or maintain their
official UTD computer account: http://netid.utdallas.edu/.

Every effort is made to accommodate students with disabilities. The full range of
resources available through and procedures concerning Disability Services can be found
at www.utdallas.edu/student/slife/hcsvc.html.

Scholastic dishonesty includes, but is not limited to: cheating, plagiarism. collusion,
and falsifying academic records. Please familiarize yourself with the university's policies
concerning scholastic dishonesty at www.utdallas.edu/student/slife/dishonesty.html.

2
 SCHEDULE OF MEETINGS & ASSIGNMENTS
The past is a foreign country; they do things differently there.
— L. P. Hartley

It is time we historians took responsibility for explaining what we do, how we do it,
and why it is worth doing. ? J. Appleby, L. Hunt, and M. Jacob

… history-writing is not story-telling but problem solving. Sometimes the

solution takes the form of a story. ? David H. Fischer

Meeting One: The Nature of Historical Study

Discussion of the following readings:

Norman F. Cantor and Richard I. Schneider, How to Study History
Use this introductory text as little or as extensively as you need: while it is
elementary, the book offers many valuable study tips as well as practical
examples of how to work with historical documents.

*John Tosh, The Pursuit of History, chs. 1, 3, and 7

Again, read as much of this book as you think you need, but focus your attention
on these three chapters.

*David Fischer, Historians’ Fallacies, chs. 1, 2, and 3

This book is an excellent example of the kind of historical work we should learn to
size up and use (as Cantor recommends) rather than read straight through or in
detail. I consult it as a reference work, of special value in reminding me to avoid
pitfalls to which we are all subject. These three chapters are especially helpful in

Joyce Appleby, Lynn Hunt, and Margaret Jacob, Telling the Truth about History

Meeting Two: A Case Study in Historical Interpretation

An Historical Episode: Sources, Evidence, and Interpretations

View Daniel Vigne's film Le Retour de Martin Guerre (1982; remastered

director's cut, 1996).

Then read the principal sources: *Jean de Coras, "Memorable Decision of the
High Court of Toulouse...," TriQuarterly 55 (1982): 86-103, and *Guillaume
Le Sueur, "Admirable History of a False and Supposed Husband…," tr.
Thomas Fox (unpublished typescript)

In our meeting, we will compare two modes of interpreting the incident, Vigne’s
film and Natalie Davis's The Return of Martin Guerre.

To prepare for the discussion, read also *Ed Benson, "Martin Guerre, the
Historian and the Filmmakers: An Interview with Natalie Zemon Davis," Film
& History 13 (1983): 49-65; *Annette Insdorf, "A Medieval Tale is Relived on
Film," New York Times 5 June 1983: H1+; as well as the debate: *Robert
Finlay, "The Refashioning of Martin Guerre," American Historical Review 93

3
 (1988): 553-571, and *Natalie Zemon Davis, "'On the Lame,'" ibid., 572-603.

Writing Assignment: Comparison of Vigne's film version with Davis's Interpretation

of the Martin Guerre episode

In a paper of some ten to twelve pages, compare the treatments of the Martin
Guerre episode in Vigne's film and Davis's short book. Your essay should
probe the aims of the two interpreters, their use of the empirical evidence we
have about the episode and its historical setting, and their successes or failures
at reaching persuasive interpretations of the incident. Make your paper, in
other words, a case study comparing and contrasting a professional historian’s
with an artist’s interpretation of a sixteenth-century occurrence. Remember that
your essay is not a Rankean attempt to tell the story the way it “actually
happened,” but an analysis of two interpreters of the past. How do they agree
or disagree about what happened? What motivates or influences their
conclusions? How can Davis claim that hers is a more historical reading than
Vigne’s?

Meeting Three: “New” Histories

Discussion of New Perspectives on Historical Writing, ed. Peter Burke

(2nd ed.; University Park, PA, 2001), nos. 1-3, 7, 10-12, and *Gertrude
Himmelfarb, "The New New History," The New History and the Old (Rev.
ed.; Cambridge, MA, 2004), 15-30

Some Recommended Readings:

Richard J. Evans, In Defense of History
Gertrude Himmelfarb, The New History and the Old: Critical Essays and Reappraisals
Keith Jenkins, On “What is History?”: From Carr and Elton to Rorty and White
Philippe Carrard, Poetics of the New History: French Historical Discourse from
Braudel to Chartier
Robert F. Berkhofer, Beyond the Great Story: History as Text and Discourse
Arthur Lovejoy, “The Historiography of Ideas” [1938], Essays in the History of
Ideas (Baltimore, 1948): 1-13
John Toews, “Intellectual History after the Linguistic Turn,” American Historical
Review 92 (1987): 879-907
Daniel Wickberg, “Intellectual History vs. the Social History of Intellectuals,” Rethinking
History 5 (2001): 383-395
Lynn Hunt, ed., The New CulturalHistory
Victoria Bonnell and Lynn Hunt, eds., Beyond the Cultural Turn: New Directions in the
Study of Society and Culture
“What’s Beyond the Cultural Turn?” American Historical Review 107 (2002): 1475-1520
Elizabeth A. Clark, History, Theory, Text: Historians and the Linguistic Turn