Imágenes de páginas
PDF
EPUB

worthy to be noted, wherewith we will make an end of this booke. It is a thing well knowne, and yet freshe in memorie among the inhabitants of the Iland, that there was sometime two kings (of the which one was the father of Guarionex, of whom wee made mention before) whiche were woont to absteine fiue daies together continually from meate & drinke, to know somewhat of their Zemes of thinges to come, and that for this fasting being acceptable to their Zemes, they receiued answere of them, that within few yeeres there shoulde come to the Iland a nation of men couered with apparell, which shoulde destroy all the customes and ceremonies of the Iland, and either slay all their children, or bring them into seruitude. The common sort of the people vnderstoode this oracle to be ment of the Canibales, & therefore when they had any knowledge of their comming, they euer fled, and were fully determined neuer more to aduenture the battayle with them. But when they sawe that the Spanyardes hadde entred into the Ilande, consulting among themselues of the matter, they concluded that this was the nation whiche was ment by the oracle. Wherein their opinion deceiued them not, for they are nowe all subject to the Christians, all such being slayne as stubernely resisted: Nor yet remayneth there anie memorie of their Zemes, for they are all brought into Spayne, that wee might bee certyfied of their illusions of euill spirits and Idolles, the which you your selfe (most noble Prince) haue seene and felt when I was present with you.

THE POINT OF VIEW IN HISTORY.

BY WILLIAM E. FOSTER.

What is history? Is it, essentially, science; or is it, essentially, literature; or must we make a still different answer to the question?

Although the problem involved in these questions is by no means new, it has hardly ever been discussed with greater earnestness than in our own day, nor has it perhaps been discussed with greater frequency than during the last twenty-five years. During this period have appeared the various publications by the German historian, Lamprecht, relating to history, including his latest volume of lectures, which has been translated into English under the suggestively interrogative title: "What is history?"

The literature of the subject, as a whole, is most voluminous; and the answers to this very question, direct or implied, are bewilderingly diverse. In the Eighteenth Century Montesquieu seemed to conceive of history as based very decidedly on physiography, or the study of the earth's surface.3

1Lamprecht, Karl. Moderne Geschichtswissenschaft. Freiburg im Breisgau H. Heyfelder. 1905. This is translated into English under the following title: "What is history? Five lectures on the modern science of history Translated from the German by E. A. Andrews." New York. The Macmillan Co., 1905.

"On the literature of the subject, in general, a very useful "Bibliography of the study and teaching of history" has been prepared by James Ingersoll Wyer, Jr., and published in the "Annual report" of the American Historical Association, 1899, v. 1, p. 559-612. There should also be noted the more than one hundred citations included in the "Notes" appended to Lord Acton's inaugural lecture at Cambridge, on "The study of history," (p. 75-142), London: Macmillan & Co., 1895; also Dr. William Preston Johnston's paper on "Definitions of history," in the "Annual report" of the American Historical Association, 1895, p. 45-53. Other enumerations of writers who have defined history will be found in Dr. Robert Flint's "History of the philosophy of history," pt. 1, (1894), New York; C. Scribner's Sons, p. 8-12.

See also p. v-viii of Dr. G. Stanley Hall's "Methods of teaching history," (Ed. 1886), for brief references.

See Books 14-18 of "L'esprit des lois," first published at Paris in 1748. A recent volume of much interest, by H. B. George, discusses "The relations of geography and history." Oxford University Press, 1901.

The late John W. Draper, an American historian, apparently sympathized sympathized with this view, extending it also to physiology, or the study of the human body. The famous English historian, Freeman, defined history as "past politics," and politics as "present history." This is a view of the subject which appealed also to another recent English historian, Lecky.3 Two eminent economists, writing respectively in England and America, (Thorold Rogers and Seligman), emphasize its connection with economics. History is definitely included under sociology by a very eminent English scholar, Frederic Harrison.5 A historian's conception of history is embodied in an incidental remark of the late Judge Chamberlain, in 1887, as follows: "the record of impartial judgment concerning the motives and conduct of men, of parties, and of nations, set forth in their best light." It is interesting also to notice the views incidentally expressed by men whose fields of study are somewhat remote from history. For instance, it is closely connected with the human will, by Dr. Hugo Münsterberg,' in one of his brilliant psy

1Mr. Draper's views are embodied not only in his "History of the American Civil War," (New York, Harper & Bros., 1867-70, 3 v.), but in his "History of the intellectual development of Europe, "(New York: Harper & Bros, 1861, 2 v.)

Freeman, Edward Augustus. Lectures to American audiences, (Pub. 1882), p. 207. Compare also his "Methods of historical study," (1886), p. 44. This view was also held by Herbert B. Adams. See the Johns Hopkins University studies in historical and political science, v. 1, p. 12.

Lecky, William Edward Hartpole. Political (The) value of history. New York: D. Appleton & Co. 1893. [Delivered as an inaugural address at Birmingham, 1892.] *Rogers, James Edward Thorold. Economic (The) interpretation of history. New York: G. P. Putnam's Sons, 1888.

Seligman, Edward R. A. Economic (The) interpretation of history. New York: Macmillan Co., 1902.

"History is only one department of sociology, just as natural history is the descriptive part of biology." At p. 138 of Mr. Harrison's volume, "The meaning of history and other historical pieces," London: Macmillan & Co. 1900.

6" Papers" of the American Historical Association, v. 3, (1888), p. 53. Reprinted in the volume "John Adams," etc., by Mellen Chamberlain, Boston; Houghton, Mifflin & Co., 1898, p. 139.

Another definition of history is given by our associate, Mr. James Phinney Baxter, as follows: "The orderly expression of great forces whose continuity of action gives it unity." ("Proceedings of the American Antiquarian Society," Oct. 21, 1899, new series, v. 13, p. 142.)

7This whole mighty system of will-reference is what we call human history." Hugo Münsterberg's "The eternal life," Boston: Houghton, Mifflin, & Co., 1905, p. 33.

chological studies; while, in some recent Lowell Institute lectures on literature, by George Edward Woodberry,' it is connected with "race-power." Nor should it be forgotten that there are those who regard history as an art. But without further enumerating these very diverse views, we may notice that there are few among them which come with so much surprise to a reader who is without special training in history, as that of Lamprecht, already cited above. This eminent German historian, after a careful survey of the entire field, declares deliberately: "History in itself is nothing but applied psychology." Page 29. ("Geschichte ist an sich nichts als angewandte Psychologie." Page 16.) It is small wonder that one of the reviewers of Lamprecht, after devoting three pages to a consideration of the book, closes by asking: "What is history?" or, rather, "Where is history?"?

And yet, diverse as are these points of view, much the greater part of the discussion which has been carried on, in English, at least, has been a dispute as to whether history ought to be written from the "literary" point of view or from the "scientific" point of view; and on this question the divergence of opinion is sharp indeed. On the one hand, it is argued, sometimes seriously, and sometimes in a very charmingly humorous vein,3 that the literary point of view is the only point of view, and that the dull facts of history must be dressed up. "A distinguished author," says Mr. William C. Todd, in a recent article, once said to the writer that "it was not right to turn a man out into

"History is so much of past experience as abides in race-memory; and underlies race-literature in the same way that a poet's own experience underlies his expression of life." In "The torch-eight lectures on race power in literature," New York: McClure, Phillips, & Co., 1905, p. 38.

2Dr. Asa Currier Tilton, in the American Historical Review, Oct., 1905, v. 11, p. 121.

For an admirable discussion of the subject with a humorous appreciation and lightness of touch almost worthy of Charles Lamb, see "The gentle reader." by Samuel M. Crothers, Boston: Houghton, Mifflin, & Co., 1903, particularly, his chapter entitled "That history should be readable."

"New England Historical and Genealogical Register, April, 1890, v. 44, p. 172.

the world naked-he should be dressed up." Apparently some history is written on precisely this principle.

At the other extreme will be found the eminent English scholar, Professor John Bagnall Bury, who, in his recent inaugural address, took occasion to remark severely: "It has not yet become superfluous to insist that history is a science, no less and no more." "When this," he adds, "has been fully taken to heart, though there may be many schools of political philosophy, there will no longer be divers schools of history." It is quite evident that the adherents of these two extremes can hardly hope to find themselves assenting to each other's declarations. So irreconcilable, indeed, are they that one is almost forced to inquire whether some different point of view is not possible,—a tertium quid, so to speak.

[ocr errors]

NEED OF DEFINITION.

We know that some difficulties result from inadequate definition. If, as has already been stated, history is sometimes defined as literature and sometimes as science, let us define, if possible, these terms themselves. It is, in in some sense, a misfortune that both of these words have been laid hold of, in our complex "mother tongue," to express widely varying concepts. As a consequence, the attempt to make either one of them fit some definitely specified set of ideas, rather than another, may sometimes leave the impression of using terms loosely. Still, the following definitions are submitted as perhaps covering the requirements.

Literature, on the one hand, may be regarded as something vital and noteworthy, not only in its content, (which may be either a thought, or a principle, as well as an event), but also in its verbal form. But literature, in order to

1At p. 7 of his "Inaugural lecture," as Regius Professor of Modern History at the University of Cambridge, Jan, 26, 1903, Cambridge: University Press, 1903. 2Ibid. It is not strange that so extreme, not to say dogmatic a deliverance, has called forth spirited protests.

« AnteriorContinuar »