The Beginner’s Quest WHAT HISTORY INCLUDES History has a great variety of definitions and applications. In the broadest sense, it considers every act-ion and every thought that man has had since his first appearance and records every significant advance or recession. It attempts to evaluate all the developments in science, in art, in literature, in philosophy; in architecture, in sociology, in politics, in war, in religion.. and In law. It sketches as complete a picture as possible of everything that has influenced man directly or indirectly. Points of View History has not always been so broadly interpreted. For a 'long time, historians were concerned primarily with politics. Freeman, an eminent English historian of the 19th century, defined history as "past politics." Herodotus, the first great historian, neglected social and economic forces and overemphasized the personal element. Today, students of history disagree as to which of the various phases is most important. The economic determinists claim that" the fundamental condition of all life is economic," while the hero-worshipers and others think that the individual is all-important. These are extreme points of view: the first is fatalistic, neglects ethical forces, and minimizes the importance of great men ; .the second fails to recognize the fact that great men do not produce the age but are manifestations of it. The correct interpretation of 'history proceeds from a combination of the two in a modified form. Function of History History, more than any other subject, has been enslaved and distorted for selfish purposes. Members of the. clergy have used it to glorify and to promote the interests of the church, statesmen have utilized it to sway masses, and writers have distorted facts to substantiate their conclusions. War spirit has' been kindled through undue emphasis upon facts, if not falsification of them. In our own country, the Northerner insists upon an interpretation of the Civil War different from that which the Southerner demands. The historian is likely to exaggerate the history of his own country-sometimes unintentionally- because of his environment, and sometimes in order to facilitate the sale of his book. In 'all countries, there are zealots in responsible positions who cannot bear to have their fatherland criticized. Truth is frequently sacrificed at the altar of patriotism. Henry C. Lea, an outstanding American historian, declared that history should be. "a serious attempt to ascertain the severest truth as to the past and set it forth without fear or favor." Michelet, famous French historian. believed that" sacrilege and the mocking of false gods are the historian's first duty, his indispensable instrument for reestablishing the truth." The" New History:" The slight progress that we have made in the direction indicated by Lea and Michelet is rather discouraging, but there is a trend toward a broader and more inclusive point of view in the writing and teaching of history. World history, correctly interpreted, puts the individual state in the proper perspective and lessens the dangers of excessive nationalism. History has become more than war and politics. To make the story com- plete, the historian of the new school makes use of the work of the ethnologist, the anthropologist, the geographer, the archaeologist, the geologist, the psychologist, the astronomer, ~ zoologist, the biologist, the chemist, the sociologist, and the economist. He is concerned with man's cultural advances and his society, as well as with charters, constitutions, and wars. There are dangers, as well as virtues, in the vast scope of the "new history." Overpopularization and underspecialization tend to cheapen history and to destroy some of its qualities as a basic and sober study. There are decided advantages in the comprehension of the broad scope of history, but, in addition, the student-should be able to appreciate the depth or the subject. Years of research have been spent and volumes have been written on a single topic. Without these specialized works, surveys would be of no particular value. Professor Bernadette Schmitt has written a' two-volume work on the events of the few days that preceded the" outbreak of World 'War I in 1914, while in about the same number of pages, H. G. Wells" has written the whole story of mankind, from the creation to the present time. Both authors have made distinct view. Professor Schmitt has explored to its extremities one comparatively small subject, and H. G. Wells has .given a broad interpretation of history based upon numerous detailed studies made by others. However, some of the historians or the new history" have sacrificed important fundamental facts in order to make a chronicle of heroic persons and romantic occurrences They have overstepped the point where history and fiction should meet. The historian should make his description of .the past lifelike. Hence, he should include grim realities as well as romantic incidents. Is History a Science? There has been great controversy over ·the question whether or not history is a science. The historian’s work is concerned largely with the character, reliability. and defects of his sources. Facts may be arranged in systematic order and in accordance with established laws of research, but the information is inferior to the data available in the natural sciences. The historian does not have the direct experience of the phenomena which he tries to explain. Napoleon's Moscow expedition cannot be reproduced in a laboratory, as' the determination of the physical properties of water may be. Humanity is made up of individuals, no two of whom are alike. Indeed, every person is distinctly new- no one in the past even approximated him closely, if his entire make-up is considered. Every human being has something unique in spirit if not in body. In Goethe's words, "the best in man has no form." Professor James H. Robinson truthfully concludes that "the historian, from a narrow scientific point of view, is a little higher than a man of letters and a good deal lower than an astronomer or a biologist."? Laws in History Though history is not an exact science, some progress has been made in the determination of the fundamental laws that govern human conduct. Buckle, an English historian, published in 1857 the first volume of his unfinished History of Civilization. He mentioned the shortcomings of history as a science. "History is still miserably deficient, and presents that confused and anarchical appearance natural to a subject of which the laws. are unknown and even the foundations unsettled." He proposed to "accomplish for the history of man something equivalent, or at all events analogous, to what has been effected by other inquirers for the different branches of natural science." He intended to seek the laws, physical and mental, which influence mankind and to show how they worked in the development of civilization. Buckle died before his task was completed and it was more than half a century before anything was added to his work. Professor E. P. Cheyney, distinguished American authority on English history, has advanced some thought-provoking ideas on the possibilities of establishing scientific laws in history. Professor Cheyney writes, "examined closely and measured carefully, set in their true perspective, the personal, the causal, the individual influences sink into insignificance and great cyclical forces loom up." He suggests six such cyclical forces, or laws: continuity, impermanence, interdependence, democracy, necessity for free consent, and moral progress. These are highly suggestive and may be a step toward making history a more definite science. . Civilization One of the important aspects of the "new history" is the emphasis upon man's cultural developments, popularly termed civilization, Civilization is difficult to define and evaluate. Just where it began and where man's actions and thoughts became human is impossible to determine. Man, like animals, has senses but some are less acutely developed; man has emotions, most of which are present, but latent, in animals. Comfort seems to be the chief goal of the lower forms of animal life, but man pushes beyond that toward something that he has difficulty in defining. This intangible something may be called civilization. Professor Lynn Thorndike believes that civilization" is the product of our higher qualities as exercised first by original and superior individuals and then accepted or followed by a sufficient number of human beings to make it a social fact." Buckle held that moral and intellectual progress is the basis of civilization. Emerson believed that civilization is progress, and Bertrand Russell, a modern philosopher, thinks that it is the progress and predominance of science. Perhaps we can agree that knowledge of nature, progress in art, an ethical code, a government, and a degree of material prosperity are essential in any form of civilized society. Civilization became - possible when chaos and insecurity were minimized. Curiosity and constructiveness were encouraged when fear was overcome and man turned his attention toward the understanding and embellishment of life. . The Role of History History has an important role to play in the development of civilization. Any careful observer is impressed with the extent to which events of today are rooted in the past. If all our knowledge of past experience were to disappear, probably nine-tenths of the inhabitants of large cities would die within a month, and those surviving would soon return to a primitive state. The careful student of history should be able to understand the present and to obtain a slight preview of what the future holds in although they are fewer and less grotesque than in earlier periods. Intelligent people. no longer believe that the Nile River overflows its banks merely to accommodate the Egyptians, or that Atlas holds the earth on his shoulders. Future generations will look back, no doubt, on some of our accepted principles with as much amazement as we regard those of the ancients. This is to be expected if progress continues.