CONCEPTION AND METHODS OF HISTORY 41 



a handsome alimony, since it cannot forego the support that it has 

 come to rely upon and which moreover it amply deserves in view 

 of its long and unquestioning fidelity to literature. 



For a time, indeed, it seemed that history was being led away by 

 that formerly potent rival of literature, theology. This was due to 

 the mighty influence of St. Augustine, who not only turned historian 

 himself, but induced that gloomy young man Orosius, to compose a 

 little treatise which by reason of the strong appeal it made to a dom- 

 inant conviction of succeeding ages served to misdirect history into 

 thorny by-paths for a thousand years or more. Toward theology 

 history showed the same ready compliance and uncomplaining self- 

 abnegation as toward literature; but happily it has regained, or is 

 rapidly regaining, its independence, although some observers may 

 still complain that it shows itself at times all too considerate of 

 theology's feelings. 



Deserting a figure which now becomes embarrassing, it is clear 

 that history, like psychology and politics, is an old discipline which 

 suffers much from certain ancient associations and prejudices from 

 which the newer sciences, the physical in especial, are nearly exempt. 

 It possesses no special terminology adapted to its specific uses, and 

 historical writers content themselves with vague and uncertain 

 expressions which are in their nature literary rather than scientific. 



Historical students do not have their own books prepared to meet 

 their peculiar needs, as does the psychologist, chemist, and mathe- 

 matician. It is true that a few technical works exist, Potthast's 

 Wegweiscr, Jaffe's Regesta Pontificum, Richter's Annalen, Molinier's 

 Sources de I'Histoire de France, and a goodly number of dissertations 

 written by callow aspirants for academic honors. There are, too, 

 special treatises on the various Hilfswissenschaften, or auxiliary 

 sciences, of palaeography, diplomatics, lexicography, etc. But in 

 general the historical writer takes the public into his confidence and 

 reserves only footnotes and appendices for himself and his fellow 

 workers, wherein he may slyly elude the eye of the public and of the 

 publisher; and escaping for the instant from the necessity of con- 

 ciliating the casual reader, he may express himself with such accu- 

 racy and scientific precision as he is capable of. 



In no other field except that of history is it a reproach to fail to be 

 "interesting," that is, to catch and hold the attention of at least the 

 more serious public. Consequently in no other subject do purely 

 literary ideals so constantly invade the scientific. By literary ideals 

 I do not of course mean clearness, order, and propriety of diction, or 

 even vigorous and effective presentation such as might be found in 

 a well-written geology or history of taxation. I mean, rather, those 

 stylistic expedients which belong to fiction and poetry, oratory and 

 the drama, without which these would collapse and fall away into 



