This paper intends to critique and review “A Study in the Definition of the Science of History”, an article by Dr. Molla’i-ye Tavani published in issue 22 of the “History of Islam Quarterly”. In his article, the writer has presented thirteen qualities for the science of history and then based on those qualities has presented a particular definition for the science of history. This paper briefly states those thirteen qualities at first and then critiques them under the three headings of “the Subject Matter of History”, “the Science of History”, and “Methodology in History”. Subsequently, the critique arrives at the conclusion that the definition given by Dr. Molla’i is merely a definition for “analytical history” and does not encompass other types of the science of history. Hence, it can not be accepted as “The Definition “ for the science of history. In addition, the two topics of “the Subject Matter of History” and “Methodology in History” have been mistakenly brought up under the heading of “the Definition of History”.
)