This paper suggests that curriculum history should not be circumscribed by narrow, sometimes arbitrary, definitions that tend to be limiting. Curriculum history considers what societies value enough to pass on to younger generations through its schools. The foremost question which has not changed throughout the years is "What should schools teach?" Curriculum historians address two important questions as they look to the past and its continuing influence on the present: (1) What was the understood knowledge in previous times? and (2) What are the end results of curriculum thought and practice? The study distinguishes between the intended curriculum and the enacted curriculum and how those two often varied greatly. Previous research shows how earlier curriculum theorists and practitioners have addressed those questions. A criticism of the lack of knowledge of curriculum history by practitioners in the field is made with a strong case presented for better preparation of future teachers in learning more about the field. (EH)