English summary: Explaining is a task practiced by historians daily, without saying though which criteria count for a better or worse explanation. A superabundance of competing approaches and theories exist which suggest that it is hardly necessary to try and find a true and objective historical academic understanding. By using examples from the every day life of a historian, context independent and dependent characteristics are defined and arguments indispensable for finding a truthful understanding are detached. It shows that explanation should not be taken for granted: explanations are information of defined conditions for the explained. Diverse types of explanation (deductive-nomologic, genetic, intentional, rational) should be recognized as different ways of giving explanations and supporting an argument. If explanations are analysed, considering these functions, it shows that explanations are very dependent on good descriptions. Key terms like event, structure and mentality and their role in explanation are taken as an example and examined. Remembering Karl Marx and Michael Foucault they already underlined that adequate description is closely linked to questions of historical philosohy. The book is finalized by various argumentative methods for deciding on one way of explanation. This shows that the choice of terms and the supporting ruling hypotheses have an immediate effect on the understanding of the person explaining and the addressee. German description: Erklaren ist eine im Alltag wie in der Geschichtswissenschaft bestens eingeubte Praxis. Doch die Kriterien fur gute und schlechte Erklarungen werden selten explizit gemacht. Dabei gibt es einen Uberfluss konkurrierender Erklarungsansatze und Theorien. Dieser irritiert und nahrt zugleich den Verdacht, es sei mussig, nach der wahren Erklarung eines historischen Ereignisses oder der Objektivitat geschichtswissenschaftlicher Erkenntnis zu fragen. Aber kann man einfach auf den Wahrheitsanspruch von Erklarungen verzichten? Robert Schnepf entwickelt in seinem Buch Argumente fur die Unverzichtbarkeit eines solchen Wahrheitsanspruchs, und er zeigt Kriterien auf, mit denen man gut begrundet zwischen guten und schlechten Erklarungen unterscheiden kann.
