HISTORY.
The object of history is to tell us not only what happened but the
causes and results of what happened, and this leads the historian
into almost every field of human interest. He deals, to be sure, with
facts, as far as he is able to ascertain them, but his generalizations
and interpretations of facts are an important part of his work. The
historian must abandon prejudice, preconception and predilection of
every kind. He must deal with the people, their ideas, development
and social movements as well as with the incidents of war and foreign
relations and the actions and influence of great men whose agency in
shaping the progress of events is often over-estimated.
As everything which passes through the human mind is necessarily
colored more or less by the particular mind through which it passes, we
find that the history of the same people during the same period will
not seem in all respects to be identical when presented by different
historians. Macaulay and Carlyle, each of whom wrote history with
extraordinary brilliancy, present to us pictures of the times of which
they wrote that for interest are wonderful but for accuracy are in many
respects less valuable than the histories written by authors of less
ability.
Psychologists tell us that the chief use of the study of history is
to train the judgment. It has other uses, however, which while not so
essential from the viewpoint of the psychologist, are important in
their bearing on the development of the individual. The breadth of view
which comes from a knowledge of the relations of men in another period
or land helps us in the understanding of the affairs of our own nation
or community in our own day. Human struggles, achievements or even
failures must ever interest the thoughtful man and the rise, progress
and decline or success of great movements in another age enables us
to judge intelligently of similar or other movements going on about
us. Narrowness and bigotry will ever exist even among men who are in
intention perfectly sincere and honest, but the man who is narrow
and bigoted in regard to any subject because of ignorance of history
or unwillingness to ascertain the full facts is dishonest to himself.
History is one of the most enlightening of studies and its effect upon
daily conduct if rightly viewed may be such as to lead men to a wider
and fuller application of the Golden Rule. In fact much of what the
historian is called upon to record has a direct relation to the Golden
Rule or rather to the frequent failure of men to observe it. To the
devout mind the working of God in history is clearly shown, and the
downfall of nations may be traced in many instances to a decline in
religious earnestness and to a consequent lowering of moral standards.
The thought that human history from the beginning has been one
continuous and progressive whole without a break or intermission of
any kind is an idea for the clear expression and emphasizing of which
we are greatly indebted to Thomas Arnold. The histories of Greece and
Rome are our histories, for from them has come the glorious heritage
of thought and social organization which we have in their literature
and in Roman law. All facts in history are in some way related, though
we often lose the connection through ignorance of intervening facts or
events, or through lack of knowledge of even whole centuries of human
life and struggle.
The _Old Testament_ regarded as actual human history is a series of
documents pulsating with the very life and heartbeats of real men. It
is no dry theology or book apart from great movements of mankind. It
is the living record of one part of our race. History interprets for
us the present and enables us to predict the future. It shows that
there are laws which govern human relationships and that a knowledge of
these laws will enable us to judge what is likely to come to pass. A
study of the method pursued by the men who have written great histories
reveals to us the diligence of investigation, the labor to secure
accuracy, the care to be impartial observers that must characterize the
writers of history as we now understand it. An important part of the
work of a modern historian consists in weighing and interpreting the
statements of writers of long ago who are often the only source we have
of information concerning the things of which they wrote. No source
of information is to be ignored. An inscription on a coin may unfold
a story to the patient searcher for historical knowledge; an Etruscan
tomb may modify our understanding of a passage of early Roman history;
a visit to the scene of one of Caesar’s battles may give us an entirely
different idea of the great general’s account of it.
John Fiske said that “The real history of a people includes everything
about them and is therefore an aggregate of innumerable facts. It is
impossible and undesirable to present all these facts or a millionth
part of them and so history must be a selection from infinite details.
Historic facts are not of equal value and the historian fixes upon
those only which he thinks will help him show the greater features of
a people’s origin, rise, progress and vicissitudes. It is desirable
to have at command the more important facts of history, but the
most precious thing history has to offer may be missed by one who
is chiefly employed in memorizing it. When history is viewed as an
assemblage of unrelated facts, conquering it naturally takes the form
of committing it to memory. When it is looked upon as a development--a
chain of causes and effects--it appeals more directly to the reason
and the understanding. Most of history we must forget, but we should
strive to retain something of interest in reading history, something of
power in following up a line of ordinary investigation, something of a
disposition to seek for the underlying causes of events, something of a
grasp of the mightier tendencies and movements of history that makes it
a teacher of the present out of the wealth of its past.”
History as contained in the biographies of representative men is both
delightful and profitable reading. Montaigne tells us that “the only
good histories are those that are written by such as commanded or were
imploid themselves in weighty affaires or that were partners in the
conduct of them, or that at least have had the fortune to manage others
of like qualitie.”
Our literature is especially rich in biographies and autobiographies
of men prominent in American history, such as Washington, Franklin
and Lincoln, and in personal memoirs such as those of Grant, Sherman,
Sheridan, Johnston and Longstreet. The accounts of the Civil War by
the Northern and Southern commanders form a valuable exercise of the
judgment for they show how honorable men may look at a question from
different points of view. Such reading should teach self reliance and
confidence as well as modesty and fairmindedness. One should first read
a short and reliable book, and, after he has obtained a knowledge of
the course of events, expand it by reading longer works and by making a
comparison of authorities. Study the history of our own country, but do
not forget that it cannot be perfectly understood without studying that
of other countries and especially that of England. Students of history
consider that Roman history unites the ancient world to the modern;
French history is the story of civilization from the twelfth to the
eighteenth century, European history centres in French history.
We may sometimes get an excellent idea of history from a historical
novel such as _The Virginians_ or _The Scarlet Letter_, for such
works give us a picture of social conditions of the times with great
historical characters appearing usually, if at all, in the background
or setting of the story.