SCIENCE AND HISTORY 583 



abilities. Although Buckle wrote a history of civilization and fre- 

 quently uses the term, as also science and history, I do not find that he 

 defines any of them. He undertook to write a history of hurdan prog- 

 ress that should be as trustworthy as a work on natural or physical 

 science, because he thought it possible to discover and to formulate its 

 laws as clearly as those of the material universe. Neither does M. 

 Guizot define civilization, although he devotes many pages of his work 

 to explaining what he means by the term. M. Eambauld in his recent 

 history of French civilization admits that, notwithstanding the vast 

 amount of work that has been done in the collection of materials, there 

 are still many points to be cleared up. After telling his readers what 

 sort of a history he proposes to write, he sums up by saying : " In a word, 

 how our ancestors lived and by what labors they prepared the better 

 life that we now enjoy." This sort of history approaches most nearly 

 to a physical science because it deals with su.ch general facts that they 

 can be confirmed by a great deal of testimony. We can usually tell how 

 a people who come within the historic period lived, what were their 

 customs and their religion, what was their social and political organiza- 

 tion, even when we are constrained to accept with much reservation the 

 reputed deeds of individuals. 



The term " science " has of late fallen into almost as great disrepute 

 as the other much-abused word " professor." Both have shared the fate 

 of the man who once upon a time went down to Jericho. We hear of a 

 science of carpentry, a science of journalism, a science of athletics, a 

 science of horse-shoeing, and the like almost without end, every one of 

 which is presided over by its appropriate professor, or by several of them. 

 If we could have a science of humbug, a science of dulness, a science of 

 false pretense, each properly manned or womaned, our gullible public 

 would probably ere long be wiser than it is now. When the English 

 language contained only forty or fifty thousand words, every one had a 

 fairly definite meaning which all intelligent persons understood. Now 

 when it is reputed to include about ten times as many, each one is given 

 the significance that the ignorance or the heedlessness of the user chooses 

 to assign to it. For as Mephistopheles said to the student : 



And just where fails the comprehension, 

 A word steps promptly in as deputy. 



What doth it profit a man to enter upon the laborious and endless task 

 of seeking for facts when words will serve many more purposes and can 

 be picked up anywhere and everywhere ? 



History being the written record of events arranged with reference 

 to their relation to each other as cause and effect in the nature of the 

 case is preceded by chronicles. The peoples who inhabited all that part 

 of the world known as the " Ancient East " hardly got beyond this stage. 

 We have characteristic specimens in the Old Testament. In many. 



