Munro—Some Tendencies in History. 711 
other ideas in education, and appeals to those who are 
seeking the line of least resistance. We are reminded of 
John of Salisbury’s criticism of his teachers in the twelfth 
century; he said that they might have accomplished good 
work, “had they stood as fast upon the tracks of the elders 
as they rejoiced in their own discoveries.” 
I am not arguing that we should not study the most re¬ 
cent history. It is the history of greatest interest to us, 
and it is vitally necessary that we should understand it as 
fully as possible. But in order to do this, the background 
and remote causes must be mastered and our own period 
must be placed in its proper relation to what has gone before. 
Only the observer trained in the study of the past can hope 
to interpret recent events; and he will be very humble in 
doing so, because he knows how inadequate the sources are, 
and how great the chances of error. Each new fact necessi¬ 
tates a reconsideration of his hypotheses and frequently the 
abandonment of some of his tentative conclusions. 
Closely akin to the interest in recent history is the over¬ 
emphasis upon the new facts that are gleaned by the use of 
instruments of greater precision than our fore-runners knew. 
It is very easy now to point out the errors made by the great 
masters in the past, to correct and amplify their statements 
by the use of better methods and of sources recently come 
to light. Great is the pride of the scholar who shows how 
inaccurate his predecessors have been. Yet his work is fre¬ 
quently like the extraction of gold from the tailings left by 
the original process of mining. The work is well worth 
doing, and the results are valuable; but the total output is 
usually small compared with the rich store of metal secured 
by the original worker. Too frequently the point of view 
expressed by the saying, “A poor thing, my lord, but mine 
own,” with the emphasis upon the last clause and not the 
first, has prevailed, and the emphasis has been laid upon the 
less important. Becuase of this tendency, many of the books 
on history, and some of the university courses, have been 
of little value. But probaly history is not more afflicted in 
this respect than most of the other branches of learning. 
Other misleading tendencies might be cited; these two 
have been chosen because they are especially likely to inter¬ 
fere with the progress of our study. The historian’s aim 
