PROBLEMS IN ROMAN HISTORY 83 



texts, of long and detailed researches on the reciprocal dependence 

 of the sources, of interpreting epigraphic texts, and now more than 

 formerly, also the papyri, render the help of philological training 

 precious and indispensable. 



But it is also just to recognize that in nearly all the historical pro- 

 duction, due to the philological school, the political sense is nearly 

 always missing. 



It is then necessary to see to it that those who will be called upon 

 to solve the future problems, though dedicating themselves to all the 

 sciences which constitute the historical organism, should take part in 

 political life, avoiding, however, becoming victims of those prejudices 

 which guide the parties that are the natural product of the political 

 atmosphere. And of all these preconceptions one of the most dam- 

 aging is that born of blind patriotism. Few among the human senti- 

 ments have contributed so much as patriotism to keep alive the 

 remembrance of historical facts, and to promote the increment of 

 researches in the past. But it is not less true that this sentiment has 

 brought the greatest disadvantage to historical truth. 



It is superfluous to recall examples of the first cases; it is much 

 more useful instead to observe in how many instances the objective 

 history of a people has been usefully told by strangers and even by 

 rival nations. If Polybius was able to expose a narrative of Roman 

 events, as no other Italian historian could, this did not arise only 

 from his political culture and clear-sightedness, but also from the 

 fact that, belonging to a conquered nation, he was not blinded by 

 national pride. This greater objectivity distinguished also the polit- 

 ical work of Trogus Pompeius from the annals of the Paduan Livy. 

 The horizon of the eloquent Livy did not extend beyond the Urbs and 

 Patavium, while Trogus Pompeius saw the Roman deeds from the 

 point of view of universal history, and therefore gave to them a better 

 proportioned part in the history of the world. If the histories of Theo- 

 pompus or other authors known to Plutarch had come to us, we 

 should certainly have quite a different history of the Persian wars 

 from that of Herodotus, inspired by the glorification of Athens. 

 Germany, with Ranke's and Von Sybel's, has given the best histories 

 of the Catholic counter-reform and of the French Revolution. And 

 we do not need to mention to you the value of Prescott's and Irving's 

 studies on the most brilliant periods of the Spanish domination. The 

 patriotic historian is bound by a thousand prejudices of education, 

 and is not always in condition to judge with perfect clearness the 

 events of his country. Even if he be free from preconceptions, he 

 feels tightly bound by many considerations, and if he says all the 

 truth he exposes himself to censure. Still the treating of the same 

 arguments with stereotyped views does not lead to any scientific 

 results. What is of advantage to the progress of sciences and arts 



