Nothing seems to make the average historian more nervous than a new methodology that he does not readily understand. Over the past two decades we have seen vogues for the use of statistics, computers, socio- logical concepts, economic determinism, anthropological studies of cul- ture - the list is long. Some historians always seem ready to adopt the newest craze, whatever it is; most have numerous reasons ready that protect their own comfortable methodology, and consign the brash new- comer to the wastebasket. Often, whether they will admit it or not, how- ever, the nay-sayers feel a certain guilt about what they are doing; they seem to feel that they ought to be more up-to-date, but their ability to learn is limited by institutional and financial constrictions, and they greatly fear the adverse criticism that any use of the new methodologies in their work might receive.