The historian’s job was initially to separate between that which is related to people and that which is related to events and facts. They moved from merely gathering news, to looking at the issues that affect the emergence and decline of nations in the early stages of the fourth century AH with Al-Masudi, in contrast to the norms of historical research. So Miskawayh’s distinction between the "faith" consideration and the "empirical" consideration became clear in an innovation of “experience anecdote.” In terms of classification, the paper looks at the aspects neglected by the Al-Tabari school, which considers history as “arguments of minds and thoughts of souls,” in addition to Al-Maqdisi’s intellectual consideration, tools of debate and controversy in historical research, and attention to the “value criterion” in Miskawayh’s conception. The historical school would come to be based on Ali ibn al-Athir through the binary of “al-qashra” (outer cover) and “al-lib” (core) that preceded Ibn Khaldun’s concept of “al-zahir” (the evident) and the “al-batin” (the intrinsic) by centuries. The study discusses two tools for historical analysis: Ibn Khaldun’s “laws of `Umran” (human life and society) and Bar Hebraeus’ “civilizational periodization,” by which he transcends the historical dynasties to monitor the transition from one civilization to another, according to the degree of its closeness to “knowledge”, rooted in the “civilization of thought” and “civilization of industry”, then “civilization of power” down to the “non-civilization.” The study makes several conclusions, the most prominent of which is the need to counter inherited generalizations that established the dominance of certain milestones and neglected the merits of others deserving attention.