The work first appeared in 1954; it remains a classic counter to the positivist historiography that had ruled the Sorbonne until the Second World War. Marrou is indebted to the work of philosopher Raymond #Aron (especially his landmark Introduction to the Philosophy of History) and now tries to establish a new, reasonably reliable basis on which to study the past, given that human objectivity is impossible. He proposes a synthesis of the objective reality of the past (which is too large and remote to be fully known) and the subjective value of the historian's viewpoint into a history that possesses an "authenticity" that vindicates both the "truth" about the past and the "truth" of the historian's standpoint. "History is the knowledge of man's past" and thus is the past phenomena that our minds can detect and shape as both our reason and opinions allow. Readers will immediately note that Marrou's argument is circular, for it is inevitable that the subjective and the objective will agree, because the subjective will usually be able to put the objective at its beck and call. There is an overreliance on human reason, logic, and prudence, which may be due to Marrou's classical training and Thomistic heritage. He seems to believe that most historians see the things in the past that they "ought" to see. Thus, he is not likely to be a favorite of either "new" history scholars or of historical deconstructionists. Marrou does, however, concede the vulnerability of his position and that of every other; eventually, historical knowledge must be propelled by faith in the enterprise. This work is informative as a relatively early exposition of French antipositivism. But it also provides useful suggestions on how to do history in ways that are faithful to one's viewpoints and to the reality of the past. (James Kennedy) (Abstract via Allan Megill)