New-York tribune., 1894-01-21
HISTORY.
THE BEGINNING OF AN ELABORATE
WORK

HISTORY OF THE PHILOSOPHY OF HISTORY
BY Robert Flint. PIP. xvii Vo' Chares oc'io-
ner's Sons.
Fundamental consideration for Professor Flint
r. the difference betw zen two familiar uses of
.he word "history" The original Greek word
meant simply inquiry and only gradually came
To be applied also to the results or inquiry the
knowledge or information obtained by asking
questions Later still. that is. with Polybius ana
Plutarch II took on the meaning OF narrative
written account of the results OF inquiry. Inc
last is the usual meaning of the wcrd In modern
times But one might also, with the expectation
Of being accurately understood speak or the
history OF a race which he knew had never peeh
mentioned in writing. THE history or Engiahu
which actually happened. says Mr. Flint, can
,ot "a s,Iv no confounded with the history of Eng
land written by Mr. Green" The stone flung
in this innocent manner is apparently in
tended to bring down more than one -piru.
However this may be- it makes clear the
distinction between given series OF eVeh's anu
a given record Of that series of events both
of which NAV go by the name of history Mr.
Flint's complaint is that proper discrimination
is not always made and that failure to make
II almost invariably occurs just where the
gre atest care was to be expected. But mani
testify any science purportng to he science Oh
history would present very dihercnt aspeo''
when considered by turns in relation 10 'ne ac'-
ual course of events and to the record vi '"ose
events With the latter. 1t would be co'lpa'a-
lively simple matter sort OF applied SCIENCE
responding with words more or less instructive
to such questions as How should history DE
studied? How should t be presented! WIN
what aims should 1t be written? Wha' are 'he
sources of historical knowledge. and how are we
to fudge Of their genuineness. integrity ana
credibility? What are the means OF historica'
research? And others without limit, which VIII
occur to the mind Of every reader OF DOCKS OH
history 1t is the part of what is known as HIS
toric to answer such questions AS SCIENCE
this corresponds TO the art Of Historiography.
To the ancients all the science there was IN 'he
matter referred to these questions and not to
that which Is the theme of the modern science
and philosophy of history. 1t is wonder that a
specifc word has not been invented Tor the
proper science Of history. If Historicgraphy'
whv not Historiology? But that is neither here
nor thore What Is manifest is that though one
had all the histories Of England. say. that have
over been written he might yet not be in pos
session OF the actual and complete history or
that country For all the books would probably
omit some happenings in which England was
concerned would state others incorrectly. ana
add a few perhaps. that never took place When
the exhibition of what has happened agrees
yo,nuteIv with that which il was intended to ex-
hibit. then the two aspects Of the word history
will be practically identical Meanwhile. the dis
crepancy Is great enough to daunt the most
ambitious writers. and they can hardly be
blamed for seeking to restrict their field OF IN
vestigaton. On the other hand. Mr. Fiint Is
right when he objects to Dr. Arnoids dehniton
of history as the biography of a society; to
ly1J t& rO-
fessor Creighton's. who regards history las the
record of human action. and of thought only IN
its direct influence upon action to NJ: Bour-
deaus. who considers it as the science of the
DEVELOPMENT of reason and to Professor Bern
heirn's who calls il 1.-The science of the develop
ment of men in their working social beings
Even II the specific criticism which he makes
upon each Of these statements be rejected. there
would remain the one insuperable objection that
none of them covers the field. Professor Flint
himself maintains that history lis the entire
course Of events in time and he adds, what
ever happens is history
Accepting this definition. 1T is easy to see that
downright history can never be written. Inc
very possibility Of it has passed away In the loss
of memory or record of many things that nave
happened It Is not certain that enough data are
left to perfect a science or philosophy Of history
Is the movement of the race one OF constant
progress Of cyclic change. or of pendulous vibra-
tions between growth and decay? The ultimate
object of all science namely provision. is prac-
tically impossible as yet in history Almost the
only modern French historian whom Professor
Flint credits with capacity for penetrating the
future Is De Tocqueve: and De Tocqueville s
success was due to his individual perspicacity,
to his caution to his modesty TO his care. and
not to any principles which could be stated for
The benefit Of others. August Comte who flung
his prophecies about with arrogant certainty and
lavish freedom almost never hit the truth. Yet
there reasons for not agreeing with those
who deny the existence OF historical science
or Of a philosophy of history. So thinks Profess
sor Flint and he censures those who, like Mr.
Goldwin Smith, seem to assert that events occur
in history with partial or incomplete causes. He
maintains that history, we'll as geology, shows
the working Of natural laws and must have.
therefore, an order which can be traced But
after ALL he does not make very vivid dis
tnction between his science and his philosophy.
He deems the latter term more comprehensive.
but he aims to philosophize within the restric-
tions which modern conceptions of science i'm
pose upon him. IT, upon completing the wide sur
vey Of European historical literature which Is
only begun in this volume. he shall be- able to
show that the tendency Of investigators EVERY
where has been toward uniformity in the inter-
probation Of history. then he will have demon
strated what is certainly now only tentative.
Professor Flint scrutnzes with minute care
the classical and medieval periods for such
signs as may be found Of a consciousness on the
part Of writer's that there was order and law
in history. He find. that the growth Of history
toward the scientific stage has been attended
by the growth of ideas of progress. Of human
unity and Of freedom, which were practically
unknown to ancents and but darkly conceived
in the Middle Ages. The Greeks and Romans
spoke OF the movement in the worlds history
much the humor took them. as progress
decadence. or recurrence in cycles. When they
aimed to be scientific they agreed with the
Stoics in talking Of cycles But they saw clearly
enough what Improvement there had been in