MiisciiDi-Hisfory and MtiseiiuLs of History. 77 



they are to physical science, their most enthusiastic friend dares not 

 hope. The two departments of science are too inihke. 



The historian studies events and their causes; the naturahst studies 

 objects and the forces Ijy which their existence is determined. The 

 naturahst may asseml)le in a museum objects from ever}- quarter of the 

 globe and from every period of the earth's history. IMuch of his work 

 is devoted to the observation of finished structure, and for this purpose 

 his specimens are at all times ready. When, however, he finds it neces- 

 sary to study his subject in other aspects, he may have recourse to the phws- 

 ical, chemical, and physiological laboratories, the zoological and botanical 

 gardens, and aquaria, which should form a part of ever)^ perfect museum 

 system. Here, almost at will, the phenomena of nature may ])e scruti- 

 nized and confirmed by repeated observation, while studies impractica- 

 ble in the nursery may usually be made by members of its staff, who 

 carry its appliances with them to the seashore or to distant lands. 



The requirements of the historian are very different. Nevertheless, I 

 am confident that the nuiseum may be made in his hands a most potent 

 instrumentality for the promotion of historical studies. Its value is per- 

 haps less fully realized than it would be were it not that .so many of 

 its functions are performed b}' the librar}'. In the library may be found 

 descriptive catalogues of all the great museums, and books b}' the 

 hundred, copiously illustrated with pictures of the objects preserved in 

 museums. A person trained to use books may by their aid reap the 

 advantage of many nuiseums without the necessity of a visit to one. 



The exhibition series would be proportionateh^ larger in an historical 

 than in a natural-history museum. The study series of a historical 

 museum would mostly l)e arranged in the form of a library', except in 

 some .special departments, such as numismatics, and when a lil^'ary is 

 near might l)e entirely dispensed with. 



The adoption of museum methods would be of advantage to the his- 

 torian in still another way, by encouraging the preservation of hi.storical 

 material not at present .sought for by librarians, and by inducing present 

 owners of such material to place it on exhibition in public nui.seiuns. 



Although there is not in existence a general nuiseum of hi.story 

 arranged on the comprehensive plan adopted by natural-history nui.seums, 

 there are still many historical collections of limited .scope, which are all 

 tiiat could be asked, and more. 



The value to the historian of archaeological collections, historic and 

 prehistoric, has long l)een understood. The nui.seums of London, Paris, 

 Berlin, and Rome need no connnent. In Cambridge, New York, and 

 Washington are innnen.se collections of the remains of man in America 

 in the pre-Columbian period — collections which are yearly growing in 

 .significance, as they are made the subject of investigation, and there is 

 an immense amount of material of this kind in the hands of institutions 

 and private collectors in all parts of the United States. 



