This is a common misconception spread by poorly informed teachers. You DO NOT need historiography in a Modern History response at all, it is not listed as a requirement in either the syllabus or marking criteria. To quote from the Notes from the Marking Centre "In many responses, candidates used historiography (not a syllabus requirement) unnecessarily and its poor use detracted from some answers." This quote also points to a common problem with Modern essays, where students feel compelled to cram their essays with pointless quotes, because they think they need to or because of some imaginary quote (i.e. teachers incorrectly telling students that they need a minimum amount of quotes per paragraph).It's basically the 'critical' aspect to history. Generally, you should include the views of several different historians in your response, so you might use a few quotes to reinforce your points or raise different viewpoints. You need historiography for every essay in all topics, besides the core WWI topic. Make sure to integrate your sources appropriately to enhance the assertiveness of your response.
Not really. Historiography is more or less the history of history. It is a discipline in its own right. It is how history came to be, whether it was created by man, or whether it created man. Is one historian's account of Napoleon the objective account of his life, or is this merely a story for readers? How do we know the accounts of Napoleon are accurate? etc.Hi, historiography refers to the use of sources to support an argument. It's basically the 'critical' aspect to history. Generally, you should include the views of several different historians in your response, so you might use a few quotes to reinforce your points or raise different viewpoints. You need historiography for every essay in all topics, besides the core WWI topic. Make sure to integrate your sources appropriately to enhance the assertiveness of your response. Hope that helps!