Gass. Book. JX 'J ' \ HISTOM ITS PLACE IN A LIBERAL EDUCATION. Address of Prof. Wm. Preston Johnston, of Washhigton and Lee Universitij, before the Educational Association of Virginia^ at Staunton, Va., July 10, 1872. The character of this Convention, the importance and diiTicnlty of the subject assigned for discussion, and my inadequacy for the task, might well embarrass me in meeting this audience, were I not encouraged to proceed by the reflection that the most enlight- ened are the most indulgent, and that as faithful teachers you are aware how little time can be spared from the school to other duties. / You have given me for discussion: " The Place and Importance of the Study of History in a scheme of Liberal Education." It is proper to state that the spirit in which I study and strive to teach, and in which I now address you, is tentative, not dogmatic; and that I shall have accomplished my object here, if my views shall be considered useful or suggestive. I am here as a seeker for truth merely; and if at times my remarks seem to assume a didac- tic form, I beg you to understand that it is to save time, and mul- tiplied qualifications and limitations of thought not suited to the occasion. That we may have common ground to stand on, we must first consider the question: " What is History?" The answer should seem most easy; but a comparison of the views of eminent writers shows not only difterence, but contradiction, as to the proper sub- ject-matter, ends in view, modes of explication and deductions, of History. Let us consult the oracles. Carlyle calls it, "a looking both before and after." Macaulay seeks to place before us, " a true picture of the life of our ancestors." Arnold calls it, " the 2 HISTORY. biography of a society," and considers that its object is to trace out that common purpose, which, whether consciously or uncon- sciously, is the main object of the joint lives of the individuals who compose a society. Grote proposes in his History of Greece to set forth, " Hellenic phenomena as illustrative of Hellenic mind and character;" — to exhibit a general picture, the points of resemblance as well as of contrast with modern society, and the action of the socinl system. Sir Jamies Stephens, viewing histoi'y "as a drama of which retribution is the law, opinion the chief agent, and the improvement and ultimate happiness of our race, the appointed though remote catastrophe," asserts that, " to trace out the pirogress of public opinion in moulding the character and condition of the nations is the highest ofHce of History." Taine would read as in a mirror, the laws of historical development in individual manifestations; and these again in the unconscious out-cropping of literary endeavor. Michelet epigrammatically says: "Thierry called history narrative; and M. Guizot, analysis. I have named it resurrection, and it will retain the name." With one it is fact and individual man; with another, philosophy; the third strives by force of imagination to summon into life the image of the perished. To these three views of History, or their combi- nationSj all writing or study of History must in the main conform; and yet to my mind they do not convey an exact, clear, and full conception of the idea v»'e seek. You will pardon me therefore it I attempt a definition, which I shall then endeavor to verify: History is mail's true record of whatever is general, important, and ascertained, in the living past of humanity. In order to measure the value of this definition let us first consider the widest possible meaning that can be attached to the term, the utmost reach and range of the realm of History. There is a reco^rd of the past of Humanity, an unblotted Book over whose register Truth keeps an eternal watch. Here are written all past deeds of men, all thoughts, all aspirations; the plans, the labors, the fruitions of the genera tions; the birth, education, struggles, and extinction of individuals dynasties, and races; all the past; yes, all, all, all. Here are se^ down the secret forces that resulted in the Maelstrom of Barbarian invasion; or the more occult laws that guided prehistoric migra- tions, Aryan, Semitic, or Turanian. Here too the motive, light as dust in the balance, that turned the scale for good or evil in the characters of memorable or forgotten men, is printed with indeli- le types. Its inscriptions reach a microscopic minuteness in the HISTORY. 3 moral as in the material world, and again [expand to an infinity coextensive with the sphere of the human soul. But this self- registered past, this absolute History, is contained in the Book of Life alone; is scanned by the eye of Omniscience only; and to the mind, or memory, or imagination of man is unattainable and in- comprehensible. In our narrower view and parlance then, History is man's record of man. The slender threads of human narrative stretch through the immensity of the Past, as telegraph wires traverse a continent; and like them they link the distant and unknown. But reverse the telescope; view the filaments of thought and action, no longer in comparison with the range of absolute History, but contrasted with the possibility of human acquisition. Measure even the actual accumulation of historical knowledge by what is within the reach of anyone intellect, and note the difference. The count- less volumes, monumentally ranged in those intellectual cemeteries, the great libraries of the world, defy the patience of the sexton- like bibliographer; the very catalogue of the Babylonish host of authors puzzles the learned, with its names-^^'Hence History must be limited by the attainable. To know, to understand, to remem- ber much, we must consent to ignore, to omit, to forget much We must consign to oblivion all that is trivial and merely personal. We must reject whatever cannot be used as an element in the development of society or of man, or as a symbol for some great moral fact, or as a factor in the elimination of truth. To know what History is, we must first determine what it is not. It must be discriminated from its auxiliary sciences. All is not History that is valuable to it, that is in aid of it, that tends to it. It does not include man's record of the past of Nature, nor Nature's record of the past of man. The rise of uninhabited coral-reefs and the discovery of fossil men have their appropriate places in science, but History takes no note of them. So with Natural History, includingZoology, Comparative Anatomy, Anthropology, and other sciences of life; though they trench upon the domain of physical man, they do not touch that spiritual nature of which History is the record. By foi-ce of the term, History is of the- Past. But it is of the living Past; with the dead Past it has no part nor lot. It says, " This was "; but it says also, " This is." The, fact or idea that it declares to us must still subsist, in itself or in its results. If it has perished, or remains as the organism is imprinted in the rock, 4 HISTORY. then whatever its scientific value, it is still only a fossil, and be- longs not to History, but to Archteology. This is the Paloeonto- logy of History. It disinters, arranges, classifies, surmises, theo- rizes: it argues toward History; but not in it, nor of it. It strains human ingenuity to bridge the chasms between isolated facts. Archreology deals not with vital questions; while History must reanimate the body of the times gone by with the true spirit of that age. It is the biography of the living Past that brought forth great ideas and moral forces, impressed them with the seal of beauty, and transmitted them as a sacred and imperishable trust for the generations of men. The researches into the antiquities of Egypt and Nineveh illustrate what is meant by Archaeology; the legacies of Hebrew, Greek, and Roman literature have that per- ennial bloom that belongs to History. The Middle Ages too, with their germs of institutions, principles, and maxims of life, still existing in, or influencing our civilization, are a livin