package of material on Colorado had been sent, though evidently with
more thought of pleasing those who furnished the dictations than of
affording material for the history of their state. Said he, "Some of
the dictations don't amount to much, but I would like them used for
all they are worth, and more too, putting them in list of authorities,
quoting them freely, and giving biographical notice, etc." On October
11th, he wrote that he would go to Denver in a few days to finish
gathering what material for Colorado he could procure. With reference
to this he says, "I am told that there is no file of the _Rocky
Mountain News_, or any other early paper I can get. Possibly I may
obtain access to one. Still I think we will have stuff enough, all
there will be room for. I will then go to Cheyenne to get what I can
on Wyoming, and that will finish up the business of gathering for that
volume, or any other volume except what the canvassers bring in."
He calls attention to the fact that in the Colorado dictations there
is frequently material on Montana, and in the Utah dictations,
material on Idaho and Nevada. The reason for this he gives in the
typical Bancroft sentence:
"If I strike a man here, as I frequently do, who has been to these
other places in early times I follow him up there for all it is worth
of course, the same as here."
At Colorado Springs Mrs. Helen Hunt Jackson, author of a Century of
Dishonor, asked Mr. Bancroft to adopt her views on the Colorado Indian
wars. With reference to this matter, he wrote on October 13th, the day
of his departure for Denver, as follows:
"She wishing a thing done would be the very reason I would not do it
if I could help it. I speak of it that you may get the work and use
the information. I do not care about mentioning her name one way or
another in the whole work. She has been polite enough here, although
she has a broken leg, but I don't care for her politeness. I should
have had fair recognition for the service I did her in the matter of
her California articles in the _Century_ which I never got."
Writing subsequently from Denver on November 2d, he says: "Everybody
in Colorado, nearly, is against Mrs. Jackson on what some call the
Chevington massacre. That side don't call it a massacre, but a fight.
I should give their side in full, then say some few took exception to
this action, and there let it stand on its merits--that is, I think so
now."
In the same letter Mr. Bancroft announced that he was going over the
_Rocky Mountain News_ with Mr. Byers, the founder and former editor,
"a man of remarkable ability and memory," whose dictation to a
shorthand reporter was given, he said, in such a way that it was
almost pure history and could be taken from his manuscript as fast as
one could write. This he advised Mrs. Victor to take as a basis for
Colorado history, building upon it and giving it the preference in
regard to discrepancy of statement. He also called attention to the
fact that "a lot of people" had in one way and another wandered over
the region before white men settled there, and said he supposed that
what Coronado did should first be considered. As to the wanderings of
Spaniards in Colorado, a schedule sent about this time refers Mrs.
Victor to all Oak had written on the subject, to the first few pages
of the History of Utah, and to the original authorities upon which the
latter was based. After calling attention to some works of travel,
such as Fremont's writings and Renton's Adventures in Mexico and the
Rocky Mountains, he asked Mr. Nemos to see that the material for Mrs.
Victor's use in preparing the volume be taken out more thoroughly than
had heretofore been the case, and upon this point directed him to
consult the early volumes of the series and make this correspond. Mrs.
Victor subsequently asked that she be permitted to take out her own
notes, and the request was granted as Mr. Bancroft had now decided to
reduce the number of his force as fast as possible and bring the work
to a conclusion. Already on October 25th, he had given as his opinion
that Colorado should make about half of the volume, at the same time
inquiring what laws of Colorado and Wyoming were desired, and
recommending a study of "Hepworth Dixon's work on the Great West,
Bonneville's Adventures, and Bayard Taylor's Travels."
Writing from Cheyenne on November 8th, Mr. Bancroft announced the
shipment of a small package of Wyoming stuff, all that he had been
able to secure, and also his intention to have some one take matter
from the office files of the newspapers of that place, the _Sun_ and
_Leader_, the latter of which was very complete. Though returning
himself to Denver, that day, he promised to have more Wyoming
dictations taken.
In a letter dated the next day, he expressed the opinion that a proper
division of the work would be made by devoting three hundred and fifty
pages to Colorado, two hundred and twenty-five to Nevada, and one
hundred and seventy-five to Wyoming, and requested that the writing be
done on that basis until some change should be found necessary. In
closing, he suggests another line of research to be carried through
the volume in the words: "And all the way from the Gulf of Mexico to
British Columbia, I want to pay special attention to the cattle
interest and cattle men, the origin and development of the industry,
one of the most marvelous and important of modern times."
The last letter dealing with the manner of treatment of material dated
October 9, 1885, asks Mrs. Victor to do the best she can with Mackey
and the silver question in order to satisfy Mr. Stone, the publishing
agent, whose work, Mr. Bancroft said, was hard enough at best.
It thus appears that three leading objects were kept constantly in
mind at this time: one, the handling of the various subjects in such a
way as not to displease the people in the district written up, that
the work might be popular and the work of the canvassers easy as they
went about soliciting subscriptions for it; another, the writing of
the various chapters in such a way that the first draft would
constitute finished history and take up no more space than that
assigned in the volume; and finally, and really at the bottom of the
preceding, a desire to have the history written as soon as possible.
Evidence that Mr. Bancroft wished to have the work done in the least
possible time and with the least possible cost is abundant in these
letters.
In October Nemos had been set to counting the pages which Mrs. Victor
had written since entering the library, a proceeding which she
resented, believing that it afforded no just basis for judging her
historical work. The next letter from Mr. Bancroft, on October 20th,
brought the request that she bring the work "at first writing within
the requisite compass so as not to make it so terribly costly." An
intimation that greater haste would be pleasing was again conveyed on
November 1st, when Mr. Bancroft expressed the confidence that if Mrs.
Victor were to write three volumes more, they would be done in three
years instead of six, a view of the case most contrary to hers, since
before entering the library she had already worked out many of the
problems in Oregon history, and now that she was entering upon another
field, found more time necessary. That Mr. Bancroft did not make
allowance for this, however, is shown by a letter written on November
17th. Here he begins the subject by stating that it would be a great
mistake to suppose that he was dissatisfied with Mrs. Victor's work,
or that any one had in the faintest degree criticised it, and says
that all he wants is to practice such economy of time and money as
will enable him to complete the work before he is dead or has failed
in business. Then he proceeds to reckon up results thus:
"I do not know when the present volume will be finished ready for the
printer. But six years have already passed, and, calling this volume
done, it would be two years to a volume. About fifteen hundred of
your pages make a volume, I believe, and counting three hundred days
to the year, would be two and a half pages a day. When you first came,
you started off with ten pages, which we all thought rapid, but the
outcome makes it exceedingly small. This, with what other work has
been done on your volumes, would make every page of your manuscript
ready for the printer cost me considerably over two dollars a page."
After a denial that this is intended as a complaint about the past, he
says:
"Go on and do the best you can. I have written equivalent to six
volumes during the last six years besides devoting my time to revising
and outside matters. But I don't expect any one to work as I do. I am
not satisfied with old hands now, however, who do not give me say,
four or five pages a day all ready for the printer."
According to the printed rules of the library, the hours were from
7.15 sharp to 6 o'clock in the evening, with half an hour for lunch.
When we recall the complexity and minuteness of research and thought
necessary in historical writing, we must consider three hundred such
days a year heavy work. The requirement of an average of a certain
number of pages a day was therefore one which would naturally tend to
increase the worry of the writer. This requirement was also exacted of
Mr. Oak, and we may well conclude that if such pressure were brought
to bear on the two most experienced writers in the library, upon the
junior writers it must have been intense indeed.
The writing of the volume on Colorado, Nevada, and Wyoming, so far as
the material at hand permitted, was completed at the end of the year
1885. With all of the precautions taken, however, the pages on
Colorado had to be condensed nearly a third to bring them within the
space allowed. This was done, as was frequently the case, by throwing
matter into fine type and printing as footnotes, instead of making
many changes in the manuscript.
The system of biographical footnotes as it appears in the history,
Mrs. Victor claimed as her contribution to the general plan of the
work. The idea was followed with excellent results in her own volumes
as well as those written by others, the object being to make
biographical mention for the benefit of posterity of every man who
took a prominent part in the building of a Pacific state or territory.
For carrying out such a purpose, the time of writing during the lives
of at least part of the same generation that founded these
commonwealths, offered unusually good advantages.
The original intention, Mrs. Victor has told us, was for her to
prepare the volume on Utah, since before coming to the coast, she had
had occasion to make a study of early Mormon history through coming in
contact with some refugees from Nauvoo. But so much work had already
been assigned her that when the time came to do the writing, this was
impossible. Mr. Bancroft had already made a study of the early Spanish
history of the territory, and had written this part when he assigned
the work on the bulk of the remainder to Mr. Alfred Bates, a writer of
polished English and a man of scholarly attainments who had previously
assisted Mr. John S. Hittell in his work on The Commerce and
Industries of the Pacific Coast. (From Literary Industries, 267-68, we
learn that Bates was a native of Leeds, England, born May 4, 1840. His
father was a wool stapler who lost his fortune in the panic of 1847.
Compelled at an early age to earn his own livelihood, he began
teaching at the age of fifteen, and later taught at Marlborough
College of which the dean of Westminster was then head. To him young
Bates became private secretary in 1862. While preparing for Cambridge
the following year, he accepted a lucrative position in New South
Wales, where he suffered much from ill health, at one time being given
up by three doctors. An offer of a position as teacher in California
took him thither and he continued at this work for a year. During the
two years spent with Mr. Hittell, he was the most valued of his
assistants.) Those acquainted with the circumstances and the men have
accordingly held that certain incidents in Utah history unfavorable to
the Mormons could not have been toned down by Bates as they are in the
printed volume, and that the Mormon turn to the work was therefore
given by Bancroft in the pages which he wrote and in his revision of
Bates' work. (See article by Frances Fuller Victor in _Salt Lake
Tribune_ of April 14, 1893.) This seems probable from what Mr.
Bancroft tells us of his efforts to secure material for the volume
from the Mormon church, as well as his natural desire to please
subscribers to the work.
Mr. Nemos, who was a foreigner, had no preference as to the field in
which his writing was done, and it was consequently scattered through
different volumes. Besides collaborating with Mr. Savage and others on
the Mexican and Central American volumes, he wrote part of the
material on British Columbia and Alaska. By the time Mrs. Victor's
third volume was completed at the end of the year 1885, Oak had
completed his work on the North Mexican States and the five volumes on
California under Spanish and Mexican rule. The writing of the two
volumes containing the American portion of California history was
thereupon assigned to Mrs. Victor and Nemos, the former assuming
responsibility for the preparation of the political chapters, a field
in which her work had been pronounced especially good, and the latter
taking up the institutional chapters, a part which he had largely
fulfilled toward all the Spanish volumes of the history.
The introduction of the institutional feature is to be accredited to
Nemos. The writing done by Oak was in the form of annals, a form in
general suited admirably to the provincial records which he worked up;
but against such a style throughout the series, Nemos tells us that he
presented suggestions and arguments to Mr. Bancroft for introducing
material which should tell the history of the people, and that in this
he prevailed.
In April, 1886, the burning of the Bancroft business house threatened
temporarily to bring the history project to an abrupt termination at a
time when only the first volumes had been published, but the
enterprise soon recovered from the blow. Under the leadership of Mr.
Bancroft, both business and history writing went on as before, the
firm of Bancroft and Company being organized for the conduct of the
former, while the publication of the history previously carried on as
a department of the general book concern was now turned over to The
History Company, a corporation organized by Mr. Bancroft for the
purpose of handling the work.
At the completion by Oak of his volume on New Mexico and Arizona in
May, 1887, he retired from the library with health very much
shattered, leaving Mr. Nemos at the head of affairs. After spending
some time on a new work now undertaken by Mr. Bancroft, the latter
also severed his connection with library matters in August, 1888.
At the time of Oak's departure, Bancroft was planning a biographical
work to be issued at the conclusion of the task which was then
engaging the attention of the library force. This work, at first
called Chronicles of the Kings, but published under the title
Chronicles of the Builders of the Commonwealths, was to present in
detail the lives of wealthy and influential men who had borne a
prominent part in the affairs of the various Pacific Coast states. For
such notice they were charged from a thousand to ten thousand dollars
according to the length of the published sketch. (This is according to
the printed schedule, the minimum price being paid for three pages
print, the maximum for thirty. This included also the printing of a
portrait engraved on steel.) The attempt to burden the prestige gained
by the histories and their projector with such a load could result
only in crippling both. The volumes printed subsequent to the
inauguration of this scheme could not be received with the same
open-mindedness as former works. The information subsequently made
public that money was accepted for notice in the Chronicles lost for
Mr. Bancroft the regard of the press of the coast, caused grave doubts
to be expressed concerning his disinterestedness as an historian,
called out an expression of many bitter--in some cases utterly
false--statements concerning his work, and sadly damaged the literary
reputation he had been for nearly twenty years building on the work
done under his direction.
While it was inevitable that the publication of the Chronicles as a
parasite upon the history should result thus disastrously and
deplorably for the fame of the latter work, we must not fail to
recognize the fact that the labors of the writers upon both works were
not a whit less conscientious and painstaking than they had always
been. After the sixth and seventh volumes of the California history
were completed in 1888, the volume on Washington, Idaho, and Montana
was written. In 1890, the final volume on California was published,
followed in the next year by the supplementary volumes, Essays and
Literary Industries, which ended twenty years of library work for
Hubert Howe Bancroft and his assistants.
The History of the Pacific States, we have seen, was an evolution,
passing through the stages of handbook and encyclopædia before it
became a history. But when the last idea had been reached, the
development of the project was by no means complete, but rather just
begun. The necessity of the Native Races was demonstrated before work
had proceeded for a twelve-month. As late as 1878, Mr. Bancroft
estimated that the history proper would comprise but fourteen volumes
at the outside.
In his letter to Mrs. Victor, dated August 1st of that year, we get an
interesting glimpse of the plan in an earlier stage. The work is to be
divided, he says, somewhat in the following manner: Conquest of
Darien, one volume; Conquest of Mexico, one volume; Mexico under the
Viceroys, two volumes; Mexican Revolution and Modern History, one or
two; Explorations Northward and the History of California, three or
four; the Northwest Coast, Oregon and British Columbia together, two
or three; Alaska, one. Under the head of California history was to be
included somewhere the histories of Arizona, New Mexico, Utah, and
Nevada, and the history of Oregon was likewise to include Washington,
Idaho, and Montana. Oregon and British Columbia he thought could be
written in a year. Not until six more years had passed was it finally
recognized that natural expansion as the work proceeded would
necessitate devoting to the series of history proper a number of
volumes exactly double that which was then contemplated. To this
series were added as a supplement an even half dozen volumes.
If we find that the outline grew from that of a few volumes in 1872 to
one of almost forty in 1884, and that the work expanded fourteen
volumes after it had been definitely laid out, we are not at all
surprised that the part of the whole which Mr. Bancroft intended to
write grew relatively less as time went on, and the part assigned to
others became correspondingly greater. There is some evidence to show
that when writing began on the first volume of the Central American
History in 1873, the director of the project actually had in mind the
plan which he gives in the Literary Industries, that of writing with
the aid of assistants who were to be responsible for "the study and
reduction of certain minor sections" which he was to "employ" in his
own writing. Thus we find, according to the information left by Nemos,
that Bancroft actually wrote half of the volume, that Oak at first
took out notes, and that Nemos prepared his work in the rough, leaving
a considerable part of it to be rewritten. For the next volume
undertaken, the first of the six on Mexico, we see that the chief was
unable to prepare so much material in its final form, and rested with
but two chapters completely to his credit, together with the rewriting
of part of Nemos' work on the remainder. In four or five years, he
expresses the determination of writing what he can himself and leaving
the rest to his aids. This as we shall see amounted in the end to his
doing about one seventh of the history, slightly revising the work of
the other authors, often by the aid of critics in his employ, and
preparing most of the material for the supplementary volumes.
Thus it came about that the original plan, the plan as published, was
exactly reversed, and instead of Mr. Bancroft's doing all the work in
final form, except some minor sections assigned to those whom he
called his assistants, it was the so-called assistants who really
wrote the History of the Pacific States, and Mr. Bancroft who did a
few minor, or at any rate less difficult parts. Nor is it at all true,
as one authority has said (Appleton's Encyclopædia of American
Biography, I, 156), that Mr. Bancroft wrote the most important
chapters. Of course, the surprising thing about this is that Mr.
Bancroft should have stated in the Literary Industries that he had
followed a plan for the division of labor originally intended, but not
followed at all. Especially unfortunate is this, in view of repeated
charges of absorbing the literary reputation of his collaborators and
aids, and appropriating the credit for their work.
It has long since been recognized that the name of Hubert Howe
Bancroft can not be placed in the ranks of great American historical
writers. In the first place, he wrote only parts of volumes. It will
be observed, too, that as a rule he wrote simpler parts, consisting of
synopses of early voyages, or annals easy to handle, such as the
rovings of Spaniards in Utah, or the rise of a provincial government
among the fur-traders of British Columbia. But Mr. Bancroft, as
founder of the library and organizer of the history, has rendered a
real and lasting service to historical literature.
The first great end subserved by his undertaking was the preservation
of a great mass of invaluable historical material, which would
otherwise have been lost. In 1880, he wrote:
"There are men yet living who helped to make our history, and who can
tell us what it is better than their sons, or than any who shall come
after them. A score of years hence few of them will remain. Twenty
years ago, many parts of our territory were not old enough to have a
history; twenty years hence, much will be lost that may now be
secured": (Lit. Ind., 635).
It is thus for the timeliness of his labors in collecting his library
that the Pacific Coast, and the whole world as well, is indebted to
Mr. Bancroft. For this work his qualifications as a successful
business man experienced in handling books were exactly those
required.
A second great end which Mr. Bancroft attained was the founding of a
history of Western North America on the original sources which he had
collected in order that it might constitute a foundation upon which
future histories would be built.
"He who shall come after me," says he in the letter quoted above,
"will scarcely be able to undermine my work by laying another and
deeper foundation. He must build upon mine or not at all, for he can
not go beyond my authorities for facts. He may add to or alter my
work, for I shall not know or be able to tell everything, but he can
never make a complete structure of his own."
That the volumes supervised by Mr. Bancroft should contain
imperfections is in the nature of the case inevitable. Perfect
historical estimates of contemporaries can not as a rule be made, and
history based largely on personal reminiscence must contain errors of
refraction which can be corrected only in the clearer light of later
years. The handling of material by a writer who did not collect it,
and who is likely to find the places and conditions dealt with strange
to his experience, inevitable though it be in so large an undertaking,
results in the writing of faulty history. The hastening of the work
and the editorial revision of manuscripts by a manager desirous of
pleasing subscribers, and impelled by various other motives of his
own, are not circumstances likely to increase the accuracy of the
work. But after allowance has been made for all inaccuracies which
have crept in through these various avenues, we still have the fact
that the histories are based upon sources which may be supplemented
but can never be displaced. No greater mistake could be made,
therefore, than to say that because they contain errors they are
worthless. All must agree with the practical argument made by a
thoughtful old pioneer of the writer's acquaintance that, in spite of
all criticisms which may be passed upon the Bancroft histories, they
contain a great fund of information which is nowhere else to be found
in print.
A third result of the history plan, and one which is of importance to
historical writers everywhere who have large fields to cover, was the
devising of a coöperative method for organizing the vast collections
in the library. Mr. Bancroft makes the claim of having been the first
to resort to such a division of labor; and points out (Literary
Industries, 767) that his method avoids the repetition of details and
insures a more thorough working up of the field than does the
coöperative method as the term is usually understood, under which the
writers work independently of each other after the field is divided.
Such a claim might indeed be granted had Mr. Bancroft announced
himself as editor and reviser instead of author, and had he designated
the part of the work written by each of his collaborators in
accordance with the usual custom in coöperative works. The printing of
his name as author on the title page, and his general recognition as
such in accordance with press notices following those of the Native
Races, have, of course, largely lost for him the credit of originating
a coöperative method for the organizing of large quantities of
material.
Concerning the understanding Mr. Bancroft had with his corps of
writers generally as to the public acknowledgment of their work which
he would make, information is not at hand. Only one had ever before
written and published a book, and perhaps the majority gave no thought
to the rights which would be theirs as authors. Certain it is that
when the greater number of the more prominent writers entered the
library, the work was planned on a much smaller scale than that upon
which it was carried out, and, as they did not know that they were to
become the authors of entire or consecutive volumes, the question was
not then of the importance which it assumed with the later growth of
the series. What the understanding was with those who first entered
the library we can not say definitely, but his ideas on that subject
seems to have been a survival of the encyclopædia project. To Mrs.
Victor, just prior to her entering his service, he wrote on August 1,
1878:
"The work is wholly mine. I do what I can myself, and pay for what I
have done over that; but I father the whole of it and it goes out only
under my name. All who work in the library do so simply as my
assistants. Their work is mine to print, scratch, or throw in the
fire. I have no secrets; yet I do not tell everybody just what each
does. I do not pretend to do all the work myself, that is, to prepare
for the printer all that goes out under my name. I have three or four
now who can write for the printer after a fashion; none of them can
suit me as well as I can suit myself. One or two only will write with
very little change from me. All the rest require sometimes almost
rewriting."
He further adds that it gives him pleasure to acknowledge his
obligations to his assistants, but that this acknowledgment is always
voluntary on his part and not claimed as a right by them, and says
that while he is not sure of mentioning certain persons in connection
with certain parts as he had done in the introduction to the Native
Races, he will certainly not do more than that. The only mention which
he promises definitely to his writers is a biographical notice in the
Literary Industries.
"The work in the library," says he, "good or bad, is mine; were it not
so, I would simply do what I could with my own fingers, or do
nothing."
It is easy enough to see why Mr. Bancroft should wish to have absolute
control of manuscripts to insure good work, and a complete covering of
the field, but it is difficult to see how he could justly make the
claim before the world that manuscripts turned out by other persons
were his writing.
Not only was the myth of Mr. Bancroft's authorship repeated on the
title page of each volume of the history, and in the reviews which
built upon the prestige gained by him as supposed author of the Native
Races, but not a word was printed to show that any one else wrote the
least part of the work. When asked to indicate in the preface the part
done by each person, according to the evidence of a number of his
writers, he always declared that this was just the one thing he wished
to avoid. The only approach to an acknowledgment is the statement in
the preface in words which apparently refer only to indexers and
note-takers, that he has been "able to utilize the labors of others,"
among whom as the most faithful and efficient he mentions Oak, Nemos,
Savage, Petroff, and Mrs. Victor. (History of Central America, I,
preface viii). The promise is made that he will speak of these and
others at length elsewhere, and this promise is redeemed by the
printing of their biographies in the Literary Industries without
indicating who was engaged in writing and who in purely routine work
connected with the library, much less designating what parts of the
work each had done. From a popular edition of this volume subsequently
issued for wider circulation, even these were stricken out.
While the real authors of the history never agreed to keep silence
concerning their right to recognition, it was very well understood
that they would remain in Mr. Bancroft's employ only so long as they
acquiesced in his claiming the work as solely his own and made no
individual claims for themselves. This bread and butter argument for
silence proved effective in all cases. An example of the method in
meeting claims made for any of the library writers occurs in
connection with the publication of the History of Oregon. A notice of
the work just before it was issued was sent to the Oregon press and
the statement made that Mrs. Victor was the author. (Emma H. Adams in
Portland _Oregonian_, October 5, 1886, under the title, "Mrs. Victor
and Her Latest Literary Work.") This was met by Mr. Bancroft with a
letter for publication in the paper printing the notice, in which he
asserted that no entire volume of the series had been written by Mrs.
Victor. Of course the significance of this statement is in the word
"entire," which simply meant that he had interpolated a line here and
there as he went over the manuscript. A note to Mrs. Victor under date
of October 16th explains this apparent denial of her authorship thus:
"I do not want for myself the credit due to my assistants. At the same
time, I do not deem it necessary to explain to the public just what
part of the work was done by each. Everybody knows that you have been
at work on Oregon, and that is all right, although I have done
considerable work on your manuscript for better or worse, or at all
events to make it conform to the general plan."
In view of Mr. Bancroft's persistent refusal to give "assistants"
anything like credit for their work in accord with general custom and
literary ethics as well, and in view of the fact that this refusal
meant that the public would credit him solely as the author, it must
have been a difficult matter for him to convince his corps of writers
that he did not want the credit due them.
The process of making Mrs. Victor's manuscripts conform to the general
plan, which is here regarded as the principal source of alteration,
according to Oak, meant nothing except the condensation of her work,
mainly by the omission of considerable portions, in order to bring it
within the space assigned. That such revision did not affect her
claims to authorship, is of course apparent.
It is sufficiently clear, from what appears above, that Mr. Bancroft's
public justification of himself for publishing under his own name all
the work done in the library is the fact that he reserved the right to
alter all manuscripts and make what changes he saw fit. This made him
managing editor, however, not author. The comparatively few additions
he made to the manuscripts can not justify such a claim. That the
revision of Mrs. Victor's work consisted in the main of nothing more
than leaving out parts appears from two cases already cited, one in
connection with the History of Colorado, Nevada, and Wyoming, the
other with the History of Oregon, as well as from the direct
statements of those who supervised library work. As we have seen he
demanded that his writers turn out a certain number of pages a day
"all ready for the printer," so he could have had little occasion to
revise their work. The writers who Mr. Bancroft said in 1878 wrote
with very little change from him were of course Oak and Nemos. Now Oak
wrote seven and a half volumes of the history, and Nemos and Mrs.
Victor five each, while Bancroft wrote four--a total of at least
twenty-two volumes out of the twenty-eight to the authorship of which
no serious claim could be made on the ground of altered manuscripts.
Moreover, Savage says in his autobiography that, while Bancroft made
additions and amendments to the three volumes which he wrote, in some
of his pages only a word or two was changed and that others remained
intact. What rewriting was occasionally done on the remaining volumes,
was apparently done as often by other persons as by Mr. Bancroft. His
relation toward the work was therefore exactly the same as that of a
managing editor toward the matter printed in a newspaper. The latter
could never claim the authorship of the articles written by his
staff, although altered to a considerable extent by him or by his
direction.
It should be stated here that Mr. Bancroft justified his course to
those in the library by insisting that they furnished him merely with
rough notes, and that it would be necessary for him to rewrite the
work, or at any rate, considerable portions of it. This, had it been
done, would have been strictly in accord with the account of his
connection with the work as printed in the Literary Industries. But it
was not done, and the account as printed is incorrect.
Since the completion of the history, but one of the writers has
publicly claimed the authorship of the volumes written in the library.
Ill health, only too common with those who labored through the work,
has in most cases been a sufficient barrier to such action. Savage and
Bates remained in Mr. Bancroft's employ for a number of years engaged
in other work, and of course under such circumstances could not make
any claims. Nemos as a foreigner could not be expected to take much
interest in such matters, and his early return to Europe and
subsequent residence there have rendered it difficult for him to make
such a statement did he so desire. Mrs. Victor alone has printed a
general statement of the portions of the history written by her, a
course in which she was influenced by years of absolute independence
in directing her literary energies before entering Mr. Bancroft's
employ, and a consequent appreciation of the rights and honors of
authorship. Four volumes of the Bancroft histories were exhibited as
her work at the Mechanics Pavilion in San Francisco during the fair in
January, 1893, and also among a collection of the works of New York
women authors made the same year (_Utica Morning Herald_, May 4,
1893). A special preface over her name inserted in the first volume of
the Oregon history in the exhibit claimed the authorship of the
volumes.
(These are the words of the preface: "It seems not only just, but
necessary to affix my name to at least four volumes of the History of
the Pacific States, although that does not cover all the work done on
the history by myself. The four volumes referred to comprise the
states of Oregon, Washington, Idaho, Montana, Colorado, Wyoming, and
Nevada. My name is therefore placed on the backs of these volumes
without displacing that of Mr. Bancroft.")
As to the shares of the various writers in the history proper, we have
the sources of information which have already been mentioned in
speaking of the Native Races, supplemented by very full data left by
Mrs. Victor concerning her part in the work. It is thus possible to
give in a general way the authorship of each volume, barring
fragmentary writing.
From these sources it is found that during the progress of the work on
the Native Races, Mr. Bancroft had after hard labor and much revision
completed his introduction to the History of Central America, and had
written a half of the first volume. Oak wrote half of the preface and
the fine print summary of explorations, and Nemos was responsible for
a third of the volume from page 460 on, although he prepared material
in the rough, leaving it to be rewritten by a German aid whose name is
not given, but who may have been a man by the name of Kuhn mentioned
as having done work on the second volume.
Of this latter volume, Mr. Bancroft wrote one chapter, apparently the
first, which deals with Pizarro and Peru. Nemos and a writer named
Peatfield (J. J. Peatfield, described by Bancroft [Lit. Ind.,
265-267,] as a "strong man and one of talent," was born in
Nottinghamshire, England, August 26, 1833. His father, a clergyman,
educated him for the church and he took his degree at Cambridge in
1857, being graduated in the classical tripos. The church, however,
was distasteful to him, and he obtained a tutorship, subsequently in
1862 going to Nicaragua to engage in cacao cultivating. This
enterprise proved a failure. After attempting cotton, cacao again, and
finally coffee all in vain, in 1865 he became a bookkeeper at San
José, the capital of Costa Rica. In January, 1868, he was made a clerk
and translator to the legation at Guatemala, and two years later,
British Consul General for Central America. While holding the
consulship of Guatemala a third time, he resigned on account of ill
health and went to San Francisco, where he arrived in November, 1871.
Becoming bookkeeper and cashier for a Nevada mine at White Pine, and
battling much with ill health, he returned to San Francisco, where he
acted as teacher and bookkeeper until February, 1881, when he entered
the library), labored together on the volume and prepared half of it,
and Bates a fourth. Kuhn wrote a fifth which was partly rewritten by
Nemos. The latter claimed about a fourth of a volume as the actual
material written by him for the first and second volumes together.
The third volume, including the history of Central America in the
nineteenth century, was written by Savage, who, nearly all his life
had been engaged in the consular service of the United States in Cuba
and Central America.
(Thomas Savage, according to a biography written by himself, was born
at Havana, Cuba, August 27, 1823, a short time after his parents had
removed thither from Philadelphia. His father, a descendant of the
earliest settlers of Massachusetts and a brother of Savage, the famous
genealogist of New England, was from Boston, and his mother, a native
of Charleston, South Carolina, was the daughter of a French planter
who had escaped the great massacre in San Domingo and a Maryland
woman of Jewish extraction).
In childhood, Savage was several times taken to the United States and
back as the necessities of his father's business demanded. At the age
of fifteen, he had studied the Latin classics, advanced mathematics
and languages, nearly breaking forever his health, which had always
been feeble. Abandoning his studies and taking a long rest in the
country, he regained sufficient strength to enable him to support
himself, for his parents had now lost their fortune. He entered a
commercial house at Havana, and after working a few years as
bookkeeper, in the summer of 1846 joined the United States consulate
as clerk and translator. From that time until the end of the year
1867, he was attached to the consulate, rising successively to the
positions of secretary to the consul general, deputy consul general,
and vice consul general. From 1854 on, there was not a single year
during which the consulate general was not in his charge for several
months. During the War of the Rebellion he was several times in
charge, once for twenty months, and during this trying period won the
confidence of his government by laboring hard to do his whole duty.
He spent the greater part of the year 1868 in the United States, and
then went to Panama, where he was engaged as assistant editor of the
_Star and Herald_, having charge of the Spanish portion of the paper.
Savage had lost a wife in Cuba, and in January, 1870, married a second
time. Shortly afterward, he embarked for Salvador, where he taught
English in the University, became consul-general, and finally started
a newspaper. Just as this last enterprise was beginning to pay, his
wife's precarious health necessitated his removal to a better climate,
and he settled in Guatemala. Here he established a fine printing
office, and began the publication of a newspaper. Though aided by the
government, the business nevertheless proved unprofitable, and after
selling out at a heavy loss, he came to San Francisco in 1873.
Throughout life, Savage was a constant reader, with a special fondness
for history. He once said that he believed he had read the histories
of all the world.
From a perusal of what Nemos says concerning the History of Mexico, we
are led to infer that Bancroft again wrote the introduction, as the
former librarian credits his chief with two chapters of the first
volume. Nemos wrote the remainder, but Bancroft rewrote some of his
work, he said only a fifth, much of the revision consisting in a mere
change of words. Oak differed with him on this point, holding that
Bancroft did more rewriting, but Nemos persists that this is an
exaggeration.
The second volume was done by Nemos, Savage, and Peatfield, Nemos
writing the first half and some later chapters, two thirds of the
volume in all, Savage one fourth, and Peatfield a little.
Of the third volume, Nemos wrote between a third and a half,
including, as he tells us, the leading institutional and political
parts, Savage a third, a writer named Griffin (George Butler Griffin
was a native of New York state, and a graduate of Yale. He was a
linguist, and had been an engineer in South America. Apparently early
in the eighties, his connection with the library had ceased. He died
by his own hand.) two or three chapters, and Peatfield a part.
Of volume four, Bancroft did one chapter, Peatfield a fourth of the
whole, and Savage a third. Nemos "assisted on parts," his work
aggregating a fourth of the volume.
The fifth volume of the Mexican History, embracing the period from
1804 to 1861, was known as Savage's volume. Of the manuscript, he
actually wrote about two thirds. Nemos did about a fourth, including
the fall of Mexico and the leading war episodes. Some of the writing
was done by Peatfield. (In conversation he claimed to have written a
large part of the Mexican War chapters.)
The last volume of the Mexican History was prepared chiefly by Nemos
and Savage, the latter writing the first and last chapters, the former
about two thirds of the volume, including the history of Maximilian
and the institutional chapters. Peatfield did a little work on this
volume. Oak's contribution to the History of Mexico, according to his
own statement, consisted of a "few slight parts."
The history of the northern part of Mexico, and the Southwest of the
United States was Oak's special field, designated by him as The
Spanish Northwest. The entire first volume of the History of the North
Mexican States is his work. The history of Lower California in this
volume, as well as that in the next, was based on a manuscript on
Lower California written several years before by Harcourt. But this
work was so altered by both Oak and Nemos in their respective volumes
through condensation, the changing of conclusions, and the adding of
new material, as to amount to a rewriting.
The History of Texas in North Mexican States, second volume, is the
work of Peatfield; the remainder of the volume, between a third and a
half, that of Nemos. (The Texas part was subsequently extended by
Peatfield for the edition now in circulation, that it might find a
better sale in that state.)
The volume on Arizona and New Mexico is the work of Oak alone.
Spanish and Mexican California likewise belonged to Oak's field and
the first five volumes of the History of California are from his pen.
(Nemos adds, "though he neglected to put in institutions, leaving
them for W. N. [himself] and Savage." In view of Oak's oft-repeated
assertion that he was sole author of these five volumes, this must
mean that they were supplied in other volumes. Moreover, there are no
institutional parts properly speaking in these five volumes, and if
such parts as "Mission Progress," "Commercial Affairs," and the like
are to be regarded, they make up half the work.)
The early American history of California was a topic in which Mr.
Bancroft was naturally interested because of his own mining experience
during the early gold days. Nemos' schedule shows that he wrote sixty
pages for the sixth volume of California, a circumstance which taken
with our knowledge of fields of research into which he entered in the
preparation of California Pastoral and Popular Tribunals makes us
reasonably sure that he wrote the first, second, and twenty-fifth
chapters. Mrs. Victor, who in her work on Oregon had been found
especially strong as a writer on political subjects, was assigned the
task of working up the political history of California, and, according
to her own statement, wrote two hundred and thirty-four pages for this
volume. We can positively identify chapters twelve, thirteen,
twenty-three, and twenty-four as her work. From the similarity of
their subject-matter to some already treated by her in the Oregon
history, and from the fact that their addition to the work just
indicated brings the total almost exactly to the figures given, we may
conclude that she also wrote the third, fourth, and fifth chapters.
The chapter entitled Mexican Land Titles is Oak's work, and the
remainder of the volume, almost two thirds, is that of Nemos.
Information given by Mrs. Victor shows that she wrote for the final
volume of the History of California four hundred and eighty-nine pages
on politics and railroads. We are thus enabled to designate as her
work chapters nine to twenty-one inclusive, and chapter twenty-five.
This still leaves to her credit eighteen pages to be located in some
other chapter. The rest of the volume, embracing the portions dealing
with commerce, manufactures, agriculture, and mining, was written,
Nemos says, by himself. Before publication, the sheets on California
judiciary were submitted to Justice Stephen J. Field for his approval.
The estimate of certain pioneer characters in the California history,
together with the adopting of the Mexican view of the conquest of that
state by Americans, brought down upon Mr. Bancroft the condemnation of
the California Society of Pioneers, who, in 1894, expelled him from
honorary membership in their body. (See pamphlet proceedings of the
Society of California Pioneers in reference to the History of Hubert
Howe Bancroft.) It is a curious fact, however, that the passages which
were made the basis of the society's indictment are almost entirely in
the first five volumes of the California history, which were written
by Oak. He has declared that even the revisions were his own and not
Bancroft's.
The History of Utah, another storm-center among the histories, was
written by Bates and Bancroft, the former, according to Nemos,
preparing twice as much manuscript as the latter. The earlier chapters
are by Bancroft, but no more certain assignment of their respective
shares in the work can be made from the information at hand.
The History of Nevada, Colorado, and Wyoming, as already noticed, was
written by Mrs. Victor, with the exception of the first two chapters
on Nevada, which were by Bancroft. Mrs. Victor's statement of her work
includes these also, perhaps by inadvertence. It is possible that she
rewrote them, however, as Mr. Bancroft had admitted that they were out
of proportion.
In the work on the Northwest Coast, we again see Bancroft's
predilection for early voyages. The first half of Volume I, including
the Spanish explorations of the coast, belonged to Oak's field, and
was written by him. Bancroft wrote most of the remainder of the two
volumes, which included the maritime fur trade, the Lewis and Clark
expedition, the Astor enterprise, the Northwest and Hudson Bay
companies, and the later American fur trade.
A hundred pages on the "Oregon Question" written by Mrs. Victor for
Oregon were incorporated in the second volume of the History of the
Northwest Coast. She had taken the American side of the case, a view
with which Mr. Bancroft was not in sympathy. By his order, Mr. Oak
rewrote the subject from an English standpoint. He added chapter
fifteen, but to some extent made use of her work in preparing chapter
sixteen. Mrs. Victor always claimed that he merely altered it, Oak
himself that he rewrote it. The remainder of her manuscript was
retained and printed as chapter eighteen.
The volume on Washington, Idaho, and Montana, was written wholly by
Mrs. Victor, a task for which she was fitted by her work on early
Oregon history.
The History of Oregon was also her work, a fact which has been known
and fully recognized by prominent Oregonians since the day of its
publication. She had contemplated writing such a work even before the
beginning of Mr. Bancroft's project, and it was only a realization of
her inability to compete single handed with the capital and other
resources at his disposal which caused her to enter his employ. In
collecting material within the state, she had the assistance of such
pioneer families as her friends the Applegates and McBrides, and among
others, of Judge Deady and Elwood Evans. Valuable data concerning
Hudson Bay rule in Oregon were furnished her in a correspondence with
Mr. A. B. Roberts and Mr. Allen, formerly of the Hudson Bay Company.
(This correspondence is now in the possession of Mr. E. H. Kilham, of
Portland, Or.) The work as written made more than two volumes, and
condensation was necessary. A chapter on geology and mining was
omitted by Mr. Bancroft; the disposal of the manuscript on the "Oregon
Question" has already been noticed, and matter on the San Juan
boundary dispute and the Modoc war was also incorporated in other
volumes. Mrs. Victor considered the first volume of the History of
Oregon as perfect as it could be made at the time. With certain
features of the second she was not so well satisfied, the most
prominent being the omission of the history of the Oregon Steam
Navigation Company, necessitated by Mr. Bancroft's failure to secure
material, and certain changes made by him in her manuscript on Indian
Wars in Southern Oregon in such a way as to throw blame upon the
settlers (Mrs. Victor in [Salem] _Oregon Statesman_ February 24,
1895). It is worthy of note that her history is the first to pass over
the political results attributed to Whitman's ride by previous
writers. The sheets of the Oregon history before they were issued were
submitted to Judge Deady for his approval.
In the half of the History of British Columbia which he wrote, Mr.
Bancroft utilized some of the material that he had collected in
person. Bates prepared a fourth of the manuscript, and Nemos and
Bowman together the remainder, Nemos writing some of the chapters and
revising others.
The History of Alaska afforded Mr. Bancroft an opportunity for further
research in the field of early voyages. He is credited with half of
the volume, Bates with a third, Nemos a little, and Petroff about a
fourth. Nemos places all of his own writing on this work and British
Columbia together at a third of a volume.
A review of the facts shows that if we exclude the comparatively few
interpolations and changes made by Mr. Bancroft, we can with assurance
declare the authorship of all portions of the third volume of Central
America, of the volumes on California, and of those on the North
Mexican States, Arizona and New Mexico, Nevada, Colorado, and Wyoming,
the Northwest Coast, Oregon and Washington, Idaho and Montana, and
that we can give in general terms, though without being able to locate
the exact parts done by individuals, the names of the authors of two
volumes of Central America, and all of Mexico, Utah, British Columbia,
and Alaska. In these works Oak and Nemos were agreed that there were
scattered fragmentary bits aggregating several volumes so worked over
by different writers in different ways as to render it impossible to
determine the exact authorship.
Turning to a consideration of the individual field of writing, we find
that of the twenty-eight volumes of history proper, Bancroft is to be
credited with four, no one entire, Oak with seven and a half, Nemos
five, no one entire, Mrs. Victor a little less than five, Savage over
three, Peatfield one and a half, principally in small parts, and Bates
one and a fourth. (This is a computation based exactly upon the facts
as given, except in Bancroft's case.) Nemos upon the same basis makes
the shares, except Savage's and Bancroft's, all slightly greater. He
assigns to Oak between seven and a half and seven and two thirds
volumes, to himself and Mrs. Victor over five each, to Peatfield about
two, and to Bates one and a half. An actual count of the parts of
volumes written by Bancroft gives a total of three and a half, but
Nemos said that he took four as the number upon the authority of Oak.
This would allow him a half volume of interpolations in the
twenty-four and a half volumes done by others. Griffin, Petroff, Kuhn,
and a man named Rasmus were the authors of fragments. Oak thought that
the name was Erasmus, but said that Nemos who gave Rasmus was the
better authority.
Concerning these facts in their main features, there is a complete
agreement between Oak and Nemos, who together knew all the details
which were to be known, and the evidence of the other writers fits
exactly with their statements. The popular estimate of Hubert Howe
Bancroft as the historian of the Pacific Coast, is founded upon the
vague references and indefinite assertions of the Literary Industries
within the pages of which there is nowhere to be found a
straightforward statement that this man wrote more than a part of the
works to which his name is attached. On the other hand, his own
statements over his own signature admit that he did not pretend to be
the author of what went out under his name. The ranking of Mr.
Bancroft among historians of the United States is, therefore, an
error, and what has appeared in the public press concerning an
"Historian of the Pacific Coast," and a "Macaulay of the West," is
legend pure and simple. Instead of one Pacific Coast historian who
wrote the Bancroft volumes, there were eight.
As to the six supplementary volumes of the "Works of Hubert Howe
Bancroft," which ended the series, Mrs. Victor had some means of
determining the authorship. According to her notes, Savage and Nemos
did a great deal of writing and revising. The Modoc War in _inter
pocula_, a part of the chapter entitled Some Indian Episodes, was
written by Mrs. Victor from notes obtained by herself on the ground.
She also wrote some other matter for this volume. The remainder was
done by Bancroft and his family, who also aided him much on Popular
Tribunals.
Pastorals was produced chiefly by Bancroft. Of the Literary
Industries, Nemos wrote several chapters or parts, Savage a little,
and Oak three or four bits of a few paragraphs each. It must be
remembered that Bancroft's writing in these private volumes was
subjected to criticism, revision, and retouching by the best literary
talent which the library afforded.
Concerning the Chronicles of the Builders, the biographical series
which followed the histories, with such unfortunate results, some
notes in Mrs. Victor's handwriting taken in 1888, about a year before
work finally ended, give us the following facts: The introductory
essay is by Nemos, as are also the reflective chapters and reviews,
together with most of the historical text. Peatfield wrote Oregon,
Washington, and Texas, though some of the latter was rewritten by
Nemos. Mrs. Victor wrote "Routes and Transportation," and a number of
the leading biographies, making nearly a volume. Savage wrote about a
third of a volume.
Mr. Bancroft as a writer of history was subject to certain influences
likely to be felt in his treatment of facts, which did not affect his
coworkers. One great object was of course to make the work popular. It
was with this end in view that much attention was given to literary
finish and typographical features. It was his practice to have a
writer employed for the purpose go over his own manuscripts and
sometimes those of his assistants to add "classical allusions," as he
termed them, for rhetorical effect. He himself was given to the
reading of English classics--Carlyle's works are especially mentioned
by his friends--as a means of acquiring a good literary style. To
stimulate the reader's attention, he occasionally made a side remark
of such a ludicrous character as to be startling when one comes upon
it in a perfectly serious paragraph. Mrs. Victor often laughed over
the interlineation in a paragraph written by her on the Oregon
boundary question of the words:
"Man is a preposterous pig; probably the greediest animal that crawls
upon this planet": (Oregon, I, 592.)
In passing upon the work of his corps of writers, one who combined the
duties of financier as well as editor of the work either consciously
or unconsciously must have been influenced by the question whether the
treatment of the subject before him was such as would please the
people in the locality whose history was being written. The Mormon
turn given the History of Utah by the toning down of certain incidents
which other historians have "shrunk from contemplating" occurs to us
as a case in point: (Frances Fuller Victor in _Salt Lake Tribune_,
April 14, 1893; _New York Mail and Express_, November 23d).
The publication of the Chronicles before all of the volumes of history
were out could hardly have lessened this tendency, as a favorable
mention of a man in the history would naturally tend to make him more
approachable upon the subject of contributing to that work. Upon the
back of the letter to Mrs. Victor instructing her to give prominence
to certain dictations, which he admits are practically worthless, is
written in her hand the legend, "Ways that are dark and tricks that
are vain." As a result of complaint, changes were sometimes made in
the text, even after the first edition was out: (Pamphlet, Proceedings
of the Society of California Pioneers in Reference to the Histories of
Hubert Howe Bancroft).
In the History of Montana occurs an example of a change made directly
for business reasons. Several pioneers justly entitled to a place in
the history of their territory disagreed with the agent of the
Bancroft house concerning the number of volumes of the history which
their contract required them to take. As a punishment for their
refusal to comply with the demands of the publisher, their biographies
were stricken from their place in the footnotes after the volume was
set up, and other matter was substituted. (The original sheets with
marginal annotations as to amounts paid and biographies to be omitted
are in the possession of Mr. E. H. Kilham of Portland, Oregon.) In
view of these facts, we are forced to conclude that the business man
in Mr. Bancroft, developed by the experiences and associations of a
lifetime, sometimes got the better of the historical editor of
scarcely fifteen years' standing.
A second factor to be considered in Mr. Bancroft's writing was
sometimes expressed by his acquaintances as a mistaking of
contrariness for originality. As already indicated, his tendency is
toward a form of writing such as will attract the reader's attention.
This tendency frequently asserts itself in sweeping statements and
striking characterizations, many of them apparently impelled by a
desire to give a turn to an incident or an estimate of a character
different from that given by any previous writer. Thus Bancroft wrote
an estimate of General Grant, which was startling because of the
general hostility of its tone, and was considered so unjust by Mrs.
Victor and Oak that they persuaded him to leave it out. (Letter of
Mrs. Victor of July 25, 1892. The paragraph which was originally
intended as a footnote in the History of Oregon, II, 246, is printed
on page 18 of the Pamphlet of the Society of California Pioneers,
which gives their proceedings with reference to Bancroft's histories.)
Again, in making an effort to avoid following Washington Irving, he
has given in the part of the Northwest Coast which he wrote a
treatment of the Astor enterprise, and an estimate of the character of
Captain Bonneville, which later historians have shown to be
prejudiced and in error. (See Chittenden's History of the American Fur
Trade in the Far West, I, 432-33.)
A third influence affecting the treatment of facts of history which
passed under Mr. Bancroft's editorship, as well as those which he
presented in the scattered portions of volumes of which he could claim
real authorship, is that of personal bias. The manager of the Bancroft
enterprise was a man, who in the course of a thirty years' business
career had many business rivalries and personal enmities. His strong
dislikes frequently assert themselves in his writings, if we are to
take his own statements. (Lit. Ind., 374.)
Again, the personal equation must be accounted for in the value which
he sets on the work of historians who wrote before him. He not
infrequently disparages their writings in the strongest terms, his
depreciation of Washington Irving being one of the most palpable
cases. (Chittenden's History of American Fur Trade in the Far West, I,
244-46), has forcibly revealed the extent of the injustice done by
Bancroft in this one case. That there are others like it will readily
appear. For the effort to demonstrate the superiority of the Bancroft
histories over others, we must accordingly make due allowance when
attempting a critical estimate.
Furthermore, the editor-manager began the work with certain theories
and notions of history that have found their way into the pages which
he has published. From the beginning, he adopted the British side in
dealing with the dispute over the Oregon boundary. In his treatment of
Indian wars, the same tendency to adopt ready-made theories asserted
itself. In the manuscript of Mrs. Victor's History of Oregon, treating
of Indian Wars in Southern Oregon which "gave great credit to the
veterans of that struggle and the settlers generally for their
forbearance," the editor interlined some expressions, throwing the
blame upon the settlers. When it was pointed out to him that this was
not true, he replied that he had begun his History of Central America
with this theory of Indian wars, and must be consistent throughout the
entire series (Communication of Frances Fuller Victor to the [Salem]
_Oregon Statesman_, February 24, 1895).
To such errors as those just enumerated the work of Mr. Bancroft's
collaborators was not subject. The dislike inspired by some of the
measures of their chief has sometimes resulted in their disparagement
as historians by a public press, absolutely ignorant of the parts of
the work for which they were responsible. (In the _Salt Lake Tribune_,
February 16, 1893, is a very striking example. Occasional utterances
of the San Francisco papers of about the same time follow along the
same line.) It must be remembered that they were not only able and
educated, but that the competitive wage system under which they worked
offered every inducement to search for the truth and to make it known
as they found it in the best collection of books, pamphlets, and
newspapers on Pacific Coast history that was ever made. The only
characteristics which were common to the library corps, as shown by a
study of their biographies, were good education, ill health, and
liberal religious views.
In general, these writers had special qualifications which adapted
them for work in their respective fields. To Oak there was a
fascination in the study of documents from which the usually
uninteresting and sometimes tedious details of events in Spanish and
Mexican provincial localities were derived. His contributions to
history he could honestly claim were better than other writings on the
same subject because of the exhaustiveness of his research through the
great amount of material at his disposal. While he admired the finer
qualities of style in the writings of others, they were not required
in his work. He frankly declared that he had little natural ability in
this line, and in the writing of provincial annals found no
opportunity for the cultivation of what he had. Oak once asserted in a
joking mood that he had found of great service a thorough knowledge of
Spanish and French, together with a useful smattering of other
languages, including English. None of his chapters were rewritten or
even reread with a view to polish, for the reason that he believed his
works had their chief value merely as records, and that an attempt to
make them fascinating to general readers could but result in impairing
their value for reference. The fact that the superintendent of
literary activities in the Bancroft library was an enthusiast in
original research who cared vastly more what was said than how it was
said is a circumstance favoring the accuracy of the histories which
must not be overlooked. Oak could say that from the first he had
exercised an important influence in the direction of honest research
and against superficial work, and that he opposed undue haste in
bringing the work to a conclusion.
Nemos, unlike Oak, was a writer of smooth, flowing English. On account
of his foreign birth he had no preference in the selection of a field,
and wrote for more different volumes than any other member of the
library force. His great ability, and his consequent position of
all-round man, are to be accounted for by great natural endowment
supplemented by a thorough training in youth in his own country, a
schooling during his London residence in the philosophy of his own
country as well as that of the German universities, and a wide
acquaintance with European languages. With a remarkable faculty for
systematizing work, he was useful, honorable, and trustworthy.
To Mrs. Victor was assigned the agreeable task of working up the field
in which she had long taken special interest. She was the only member
of the staff who had a literary reputation before entering the
library. Noted as a poetess of unusual promise in her earlier days,
she had also written excellent prose for different journals, among
them a magazine history of the United States published in serial form
by the Harpers, until the beginning of the Civil War compelled the
discontinuance of the publication in which it appeared. As a
contributor to the San Francisco papers in the early "sixties," she
had met with pronounced success, while her work on her projected
History of Oregon and her publication of two works on the Northwest
fitted her for her special field. She had the enviable faculty of
putting life into her writings, and it was partially on account of her
graceful style that Mr. Bancroft sought her services, for his eye was
always attracted by good literary work. But the volumes written by
Mrs. Victor were of a far different stamp from the popular literary
history. The late Mary Sheldon Barnes, professor of history in
Stanford University, declared that she had done her work well. All who
were acquainted with her personally recognized the fact that she
placed the truth as she conceived it before all else. The leading
opponents of the stand she took on disputed questions freely
recognized the fact that she had striven to do conscientious,
painstaking work. Given to speaking what she believed was the whole
truth, even when it was contrary to her immediate interest to do so,
she was the last of all persons whom a regard for literary effect
would swerve from the path of historical accuracy.
A better man for chief Spanish authority than Thomas Savage could
scarcely have been found. Thoroughly acquainted with the language by a
life-long residence in Spanish America, he had a natural fondness for
history, to which his long continuance in the consular service had
added a habit of accuracy, and a capacity for hard work. The fifth
volume of the History of Mexico, embracing the history of that country
from 1824 to 1861, and the third volume of the Central American
history which threads out the tangled skein of the history of the five
little republics in the nineteenth century, serve as examples of the
vast amount of detail which his writing covered, to say nothing of his
labors in collecting and extracting an overwhelming mass of material
on Spanish American history. All agree that he was a polished and
sound man.
In the writers of smaller parts of the history, we find that the
qualifications and fitness for the individual field of writing were no
less than in those who prepared more manuscript. Peatfield's
connection with the British consular service bespeaks his reliability
and capability; Bates' occupancy of a responsible position under a
prominent English educator, and the high regard in which his work was
held by Hittell bear witness that he was competent to write history;
and Petroff's standing as a scholar in his own country, together with
his thorough acquaintance with Alaska, vouch for the character of his
work.
While the Bancroft corps of writers were not infallible, they were a
class of persons in whose integrity and accuracy we may have as great
confidence as in the average historian. We can only regret that we can
not point out all parts of the work done by each, and that we can not
show in detail the extent of Mr. Bancroft's editorial alterations of
their work. This latter feature, inherent in the Bancroft plan of
writing history, is its greatest weakness, since it of necessity
involves some uncertainty as to whether the words we are reading are
those of the author who wrote the volume, or the interpretation of Mr.
Bancroft. A comparative study of the style of what we know to be the
work of the respective writers may suffice to settle a given case. We
may state as a fact that the majority of alterations in the
manuscripts of the chief assistants were due to the necessity of
condensation; and that, aside from this, the revision of their work
usually consisted merely in the suppression of radical utterances and
the interlineation of a few lines occasionally for literary effect.
The somewhat rough estimate given of the number of volumes written by
the respective writers indicates that Mr. Bancroft's revisions
constitute about one page in fifty of the work in fields assigned to
his assistants, although the average may be lower. In view of these
facts, the knowledge that those who wrote the Bancroft histories were
capable, honest persons, must tend decidedly toward the increasing of
our general confidence in the series.