THE SCIENCE OF HISTORY 121 



conditions, does it act thus in conformity with the universal tenden- 

 cies of the time, and has it accordingly the prospect of a wholesome 

 duration and development? Here is the first difficulty to be solved. 

 The second is as follows: if modern historical science as thus set 

 forth is in accord with the spirit of the time, what is then its rela- 

 tion to and effect on other sciences? 



For those who are acquainted with intellectual movements of 

 Western Europe, the first question that a more intensive study 

 of all phenomena, a closer acquaintance with nature is easy enough 

 to answer. An impression which at first took hold of the external 

 phenomena with a certainty of touch hitherto unknown was followed 

 in the field of mental sciences and imagination by a psychological 

 impressionism that discovered and revealed the depths of the psychic 

 life which till now had lain concealed under the threshold of con- 

 sciousness. The spirit brought, in regard to natural sciences, an 

 intensity of observation which appeared almost to threaten those 

 mechanical theories which, during centuries of energetic research, 

 had stood as true and sufficient for all further progress in investiga- 

 tion. In this course of psychic progress the historical science of 

 socio-psychology takes its place as a matter of course; it is nothing 

 but the application of greater intensity of observation to historical 

 material. And there is prospect, therefore, of a further development 

 of this idea, not only on Western and Middle European soil, but 

 since the new psychic existence is due chiefly to the vast extension 

 of association and stimuli which arise from the new technical, eco- 

 nomic, and social culture, it will establish itself everywhere where 

 Western civilization prevails, as is actually being shown to-day in the 

 New World and in Japan. 



If socio-psychological history is of such growing importance, the 

 more, then, does its relationship to other sciences call for considera- 

 tion, even though but few words can be devoted to it. 



Foremost and clearest is its connection with psychology. History 

 in itself is nothing but applied psychology. Hence we must look to 

 theoretical psychology to give us the clue to its true interpretation. 



How often, indeed, has not psychology been named the me- 

 chanics of mental science, in particular of the science of history? 

 But the appreciation of this connection and the practical applica- 

 tion of it are quite different things. For the latter it is necessary 

 that the study of historical phenomena be extended to the most 

 elementary occurrences and processes, even those processes with 

 which psychology has primarily to do. It is characteristic of the 

 progress of science during the period of subjectivism of about 1750 

 or that at the beginning, at least, neither history nor psychology 

 was understood. Of how little importance was psychology when 

 books like Creutzer's Essay on the Soul and the fruitful but primitive 



