ABSTRACT
This chapter introduces the debate between constructivism and realism, which, starting in the 1960s, ramified in various forms of narrativism in the 1970s and 80s. The chapter will show that the debate was based on a false distinction between historical research and historical writing, which obfuscated the ontological underpinnings of historical inquiry. On the basis of the logic of question and answer, as Collingwood developed it, it will be shown that historical research and historical writing are overlapping concepts describing two intertwined phases in historical inquiry. Elaborating on Mink’s narrativism, the chapter points out that historians, by raising and answering questions, weave narratives that enable them to discover what happened in the past. The conclusion is that constructivism and realism go hand in hand in historical inquiry.
