Historiography-the process of writing history, is not just ‘the past’, it is more of a series of questions. Different types of stories grasps our attention, and history is all about the stories that engages and interests us. These historical events need to be explained into a bigger picture, which changes overtime. Historians stive to get things right. While this is usually impossible, and depends on intense argument and imagination, history must concur with existing proof. The qualities that are essential to modern historians is the process of research and analysis of facts and ideas to answer the question such as, “what happened” and “how or why it happened”. Arnold states that, “And always there are new questions to ask. Why? Because of new ways of looking, because of other things seen before or after, because of different paths travelled. But primarily because there are gaps, spaces, elisions, silences. The sources do not speak, and they do not tell all”(Arnold, 78). When you are researching a historical event, you usually start of with a question, such as, “where did the event take place” or “what year did it occur”, regardless of the question you have eventually another question will form and there will always be another question that follows the next, it’s all a system, a process, you get a question, you get the answer, another forms. Questions and research skills are very important to modern historians.Modern historical studies normally comes across other social sciences, such as, politics, human studies, sociology, etc. Guilhem de Rodes case, Arnold figures out the different ways in which historiography has altered throughout history. He starts with Herodotus, the ancient historians, then carries on to early Christian historians. He spends a short amount of time analyzing medieval historians prior continuing to the early modern time, where he spends most of his time. He looks into the appearance of history alone as a profession starting after the Renaissance. At this point, Arnold makes use of Leopold von Ranke career and his appeal to the evidence.” Ranke feels that Arnold is noteworthy for his prominence on historical proof and objective history. In the rest of Arnold book, Arnold explains the issues of bias, both amid historians and within sources. He claims that bias is not completely harmful to the writing process of history and in fact, is essential for modern history and the history profession to exist.