The text presents a critical reflection on the historian's craft, drawing on the thoughts of Emanuel Rádl and T. G. Masaryk. It primarily critiques historians such as Josef Pekař and Zdeněk Nejedlý for using fundamental concepts like "nation," "religion," or "anticlericalism" without rigorous conceptual analysis or critical reflection. The author argues that a precise definition of intellectual tools is a mandatory prerequisite for scientific work; otherwise, research results lack methodological grounding regardless of their documentation. Furthermore, the text explores the nature of truth in history. According to Masaryk, historical truth involves more than just describing facts; it requires the historian to take an evaluative stance on past ideological conflicts, such as Jan Hus's dispute with the Council of Constance. A historian must assess the validity and justification of the historical actors' arguments. Only by evaluating these positions and identifying timeless, transposable elements can history maintain its relevance and meaning for the present day.