Historical research; an outline of theory and practice

Front matter

€mm\\ ^Xnivmii^ ^ihxn^

THE GIFT OF kli>^q..n Ij-SC^AZ.

H storjca

Preface

As indicated by the title, this book is offered as an outhne, rather than as an encyclopedic treatment of historical investigation^ and the possible reader more constantly in mind has been the advanced student who is about to enter the field of research, either as a profession or as a serious avocation. Experience has shown that both time and facility are gained by a rapid review at the outset of the principles and scope of the science; for, although historical research is only the application of logic and common sense to the past affairs of mankind, the numerous varieties of material and their respective values are not always at first obvious. It is on this account that certain of the auxiliary sciences are introduced, not with a view of providing complete information, but in order to exhibit the foundations upon which the genuine sources must rest, and with the hope that the reader will be stimulated to further inquiry.

The obHgations of the author to previous writers on this subject are evident on every page, and from many friends who are not cpoted I have received valuable suggestions. To certain of my colleagues I am particularly indebted. Professors James W. Bright, Harry L. Wilson, and Edward F. Buchner, and Dr. R. V. D. Magoffin have read the matter in iv PREFACE.

whole or in part and have given me faithful admonition. Mr. Lynn R. Meekins, editor of the Baltimore Star, gave me the benefit both of his hterary taste and his professional knowledge, and Miss Mabel M. Reese, assistant in the university hbrary, rendered indispensable aid in the reading of proof.

Without laying upon his friends the deficiencies of the book, the author entertains the hope that it will assist in some measure the extension of liistorical research.

John Martin Vincent.

Johns Hopkins University, June, 1911.

Contents

Chapter Pagk

I. The Definition of History 1

II. Classification of Historical Materials. ... 13

Chapter II Classification Of Historical

MATERIALS

The person who approaches the history of a given country ordinarily finds that some one not very far back has already attempted the task, and it may be that a long line of historians have preceded the modern exponents of that people. Consequently, the investigator who feels impelled to inquire further is confronted with a double duty. He must take account of what has already been written by the more serious of his predecessors, and must explore the materials out of which the history has been constructed. His task is not concluded by an examination of the documents cited by his forerunners. More is required than mere proof that the quotations are correct. The whole mass of available material must be assembled and the narrative reconstructed v/by fresh interpretation. Therefore, in order to be sure that all kinds of evidence have been marshalled, and that the testimony has been weighed with due regard to its quality, it is important that the investigator have a well defined idea of the nature and extent of historical materials in general.

The materials for the study of the history of society fall into two general classes:

Classes.

Distinctions.

First, those which man has consciously recorded for the purpose of transmitting information.

Second, rehcs of man's activity, whether written or otherwise, which have come down to us from time past without the conscious intention of imparting connected information.

There are certain other materials which may combine the quahties of both of these classes and which have been called " memorials. '^ In some cases the difference between memorials and transmitted history is not at once apparent, but the distinction between conscious and unconscious evidence is so fundamental that the degree of relationship must be established before the material can be used. The classification of sources, therefore, is an important part of historical research.

Much of the matter, to be sm-e, easily falls into place. Memoirs, biographies, and annals ob\Tiously were intended to be transmitted to the future. A battle-axe, on the other hand, is an unconscious relic of the warfare of its day. A boundary stone is a mere indicator of lines for practical use, and a gravestone containing simply a name is no more than this, but when the tombstone contains dates the liistorical record begins. Wlien the epitaph is extended into an account of the deeds and virtues of the deceased, the relic is transformed into a memorial. So when the boundary stone records in cuneiform characters the sale of a field at a time estimated to be about B. C. 1400,^ you have the rehc of a business transaction, but one which may throw great hght

' British Museum, No. 90,833.

HISTORICAL MATERIALS 15

on the customs of the times or the relations of great persons of the period. A Babylonian brick is in itself an interesting object, for it illustrates the particulars of a certain ancient industry, but when a fragment contains the name of Urengur, king of Ur, about B. C. 2300, the interest intensifies; and when another specimen records not only the name of tliis king, but also an account of the building of a temple to the goddess Nina in the city of Erech, the brick has risen to the rank of an historical document/ Assur-nasir-pal, king of Assyria, B. C. 885, sheathed his palace with marble sculptured in relief, and upon this he engraved long accounts of his greatness and his conquests with the evident intention of leaving the record to posterity. Not only these architectural memorials and ornaments, but also multitudes of clay tablets containing the history of his predecessors were collected and written at the command of this king. Many of the sculptures and thousands of the tablets have been recovered and now adorn the British Museum, so that the intentions of the royal patron of letters have been carried out in an unexpected manner.

In whatever form prepared, whether it be in Intention, stone, clay, papyrus, or paper, the intention of the producer toward the futm*e is the factor which determines the general classification. As we proceed we shall find that this holds a very important relation to the criticism of the source. The c|uestion whether an object is simply a relic of the period or contains consciously transmitted information is fundamental, i/

* British Museum, Nos. 90,296, and 90,015.

Newspapers.

Order of portance.

Im-

A law is properly classified as a relic of the period in which it was enacted, and is evidence of the legal and moral perceptions of that people, but if one examine a statute of the Tudor period, for example, it will be found to contain at least two distinct parts. A preamble gives the reason for the enactment, while the sections establish the law and the penalties. The preamble is the explanation or justification intended for the public, pi'esent and future, and must be judged upon its conscious intentions.^

A newspaper is likewise a complex document in which materials of various classes are included. The news items are intended to be the current history of the day. The editorials refer partly to current events and partly to political or social conduct. The advertisements are evidences of business method and social institutions intended for present information not futiu'e record. They are unconscious relics of the period. The newspaper as a whole may beTegardecl as a literary product of its time, but for historical purposes its contents must be analyzed and each part judged and made use of according to the class in which it belongs.^

If a cln'onological order were to be pursued from primitive times onward a classification of materials would begin with relics, for at fii'st these are the only evidences we have. Undoubtedly man made implements long before he began to wTite down his experiences^ consequently we have the common term

^ See page 171. * See page 215.

HISTORICAL MATERIALS 17

*' prehistoric remains/' but in the conduct of historical research the first instinct leads one to inquire if there be any record of the period. In fact, when the materials are appraised it becomes apparent that the relics alone are insufficient, and history would be impossible without conscious attempts to connect its parts. The order of procedure, therefore, is to find what has been written upon the period or topic and then determine what light can be drawn from the collateral material.

It is almost impossible to describe the various classes of documents and sources without entering upon criticism or interpretation of them; therefore, to avoid repetition the fuller consideration is deferred to later chapters.

It may, however, serve a useful purpose to present a brief tabular view of historical materials in such a way as to show the grand divisions. In the one which follows the consciously transmitted information appears first in its three forms as written, oral, and artistic. This is not the order of historic precedence, for if that were followed the remains of the human body would come first, for undoubtedly many a human creature passed from this earth before he was able to shape even an implement which would give token of his existence. Nor may one assume that the order of importance can be fully displayed in any table, for at a given point the conscious testimony may have the most value, and in another historical problem the reHcs may outweigh all other evidence. It is, nevertheless, a valuable preparatory exercise to formulate in the mind the general classifications of material and to place under each division all possible examples/

HISTORICAL MATERIALS.

I. Consciously Transmitted Information.

Written.

Chronicles, annals, biographies, memoirs, diaries, genealogies, certain classes of inscriptions.

Oral Tradition.

Ballads, anecdotes, tales, saga.

Artistic Productions.

Historical paintings, portraits, scenic sculpture, coin types.

II. Relics, or Unconscious Testimony.

Human remains, language, institutions, products of the hand, implements, fine arts, products of the mind, business records, literature.

III. Inscriptions, Monuments, Public Documents OF Certain Classes.

All of these may have also qualities belonging to Class I or Class II.

^ Compare the table in Bernheim, Lehrbuch der historischen Methode, 258. (Ed. 1908.)

Chapter III External Criticism

Since the object of history is to estabhsh as nearly IS possible the true developraent of society or of some selected part, it becomes necessary for the historian irst to test the data furnished by his predecessors md to determine whether the fragments of infornation received are themselves true, or what measure )f probability should be ascribed to them. These ire the duties of historical criticism. Criticism, lowever, is not the chief end of historical research. rhe combination of results, the perception of the gelations of events, and the final construction of these nto narratives are the great objects of the study, yet these are of no value unless based on scientific criticism. Not until the isolated data have been proved and interpreted may the historian draw safe 3onclusions.

The processes of criticism fall naturally into two Definition, parts. The &st important step is to determine ivhether the given source is at all admissible as evidence, or, in other words, whether the material is genuine or not. Conclusions are worthless and labor is wasted if the document is fraudulent or misjudged. [t is necessary to know at the outset whether the chronicle, charter, or rehc is in reahty what it claims bo be, or what it has been esteemed to be. It is important to determine where and when it originated, who was its author, and where he derived his information. The rules of procedm^e by which these facts are determined in Iiistorical research constitute External Criticism. The propriety of this definition will be more fully observed when the various materials are criticized in detail. The process has to do with those data about a document or relic which relate to forms and appearance rather than to contents. Internal Criti- The second part of the critical process weighs the cism. relation of the testimony to the truth. One must

decide whether the statements made are trustworthy and, if not absolutely certain, whether they are probable. The degree of probabihty or possibihty must be determined, or, if necessary, the whole cast out as worthless. This is Internal Criticism, and is often called Higher Criticism, since it deals with more important matter than external form.^ However, the external facts about a document are often obtained in part by a study of the contents. The date of a paper may be determined sometimes by what it says or by the way it is written, hence external criticism may employ any means at its command to establish the outside data of a source. The definition explains the kind of things to be proved, not the means used to prove them. Owing to their essential importance,

^ The term Higher Criticism has in recent years received a popular meaning in connection with Bible study which obscures its real significance. In the minds of some, higher criticism means the rationalization of scripture and designates a class of doctrines at variance with orthodox views. This is an unfortunate use of the words, for they ought to be employed without theological significance.

^he processes of external criticism demand attention first.

The labors of the historical student are greatly ncreased by the fact that materials are frequently placed before him about which there is doubt as to iheir genuineness. This is not necessarily due to ^ross forgery, but may come from the absence of proper information, the lack of name or date, or bhe presence of doubtful statements which throw suspicion on the whole. The investigator of medi- Bval history is particularly liable to meet questionable material in manuscript, and the student of antiquity is obliged to test carefully what are offered as inscriptions and relics. Modern history is not exempt, but since the invention of printing the forms 3f difficulty and the process of proof are somewhat different. The necessity for the test of genuineaess, however, remains as before.

It is the further misfortune of the historian that Error, tiis material is subject not only to the variableness and idiosyncrasies of human nature in the first producer, but also to the errors and misconceptions Df every writer who has intervened. A large part of / his work consists in undoing what his predecessorg/ liave conceived. This labor is not due to the supposition that historical writers have had a great desire to give false information because in the course of time a great many mistakes have been made. All kinds of sources from relics to chronicles have been accepted for what they were not, and it has taken a long time to correct the mistakes.

Errors spring chiefly from two evils which beset all arts and sciences, ignoranee^and superficiality, and both of these lead to neglect of the rules of evidence. In a simple age where credulity is the rule we may not expect that the origin and character of documents will be carefully scrutinized. The same result occurs when a person who is inadequately prepared attempts to wi^ite the history of a period and accepts the materials he finds in the light of his imperfect knowledge. Lack of experience in the testing of documents and neglect of the laws of evidence, because the writer was not aware of the origin and nature of his materials, are fruitful sources of error. The more one knows about a subject the more will he appreciate the quality and significance of documents as they come into view. It is the experience of every investigator that he began to see things only after he had been some time at work.

The evils of haste and superficiality are likely not only to mar the literary style of the historian who succumbs to them, but theu' effects are to be found at a more fundamental point. A partial or slovenly examination of the materials will perpetuate the errors of the past and engender new misconceptions for the futm^e. The day has gone by when haste will be accepted as an excuse for errors of fact or for mistakes due to inadequate use of available material. Yet all of these troubles must be an- , ticipated and the work of predecessors carefully scanned.

Hypercriti- Occasionally errors are perpetuated through over-

refinement of criticism. The ambition to find somecism.

thing new, or to maintain a reputation for keenness, has sometimes led to the rejection of genuine historical documents. This may not be a portentous evil, and probably is not so destructive as a captioy^— sk epticism which holds everj^thing under suspicion. ThTs may come from a pessimistic view of human nature, or from the prejudice of a preconceived theory which is easier to assert than to prove by careful inquiry. The personal equation has to be taken into account in critics as well as in chroniclers and historical actors.

Errors of statement and conception have also been handed down for which the older writers are not fau'ly responsible. New materials have been continually accumulating, the knowledge of archaeology, of diplomatics, of languages, and of all other auxiliaries of history has been increasing from year to year. Previous judgments, therefore, must come up for re^dew. Taken with the fact that each generation demands a wider view of history, the correction of the inevitable errors of the predecessors furnishes a necessary portion of the occupation of the historical student. At this point we are concerned only with errors about the document.

In general it may be said that it is not the object Object of Exof external criticism to find out and catalogue all of *f^^^^ Cnti-

Gism.

the mistakes that have been made about a document, but, at the same time, it may be necessary to trace ^out a long series of misapprehensions in order to get back to the true origin. The source itself when pruned of its excrescences can then be estimated at its true value. It is not necessary to be awed or overwhelmed by the prospects of errors to be met. There has been a great deal of fraud and a large amount of error encountered in the course of ages. Critics are wont to spend much time in discussing the variations and corruptions of texts while the sound material is left to take care of itself. Speaking of externals only, a vast body of undoubtedly genuine historical sources has been handed down to this generation. The value of the contents is the chief matter for discussion. The fact of transmission can be safely proved. Isaac Taylor, writing of ancient literatm-e, and possibly to comfort any who might be alarmed about the Scriptures, said in regard to textual cUfficulties:

Textual Diffi- ^The actual amount and the importance of these corculties. ruptions of the text of ancient authors is likely to be

overrated by general readers. . . . By far the greater number of all 'various readings' — perhaps nineteen out of twenty — are purely of a verbal kind, and they are such as can claim the attention of none but philologists and grammarians: a few may deserve the notice of every reader of ancient literature; and a few demand the consideration of the student of history. But, taken in the mass, the light in which they should be regarded is that of their furnishing a significant and conclusive proof of the care, fidelity, and exactness with which the business of copying was ordinarily conducted."^

This commendation applies to the middle ages at whose hands we receive by transmission the literature of the ancients. At the same time we are obliged to take note of a great amount of fraudulent matter

^ Taylor, Transmission of Ancient Books to Modern Times, 20.

emanating from the writers of that very period itself. The presence of both good and bad is not strange, for that is also a characteristic of this modern so-called scientific age. The situation calls simply for alertness of mind for the distinguishing of the two. Some classes of material were more susceptible to falsification than others because the rewards of fraud were more seductive.

Assuming that we have a work or document before Order of Prous for criticism, the order of procedure is logical and ^^^^^®- plain. If the matter in cjuestion purports to be a mediaeval manuscript the investigator appeals first to the tests of palseogTaphy. The chirography of every epoch of European history has been so carefully studied that it is possible to identify at least the period in which a genuine manuscript originated. The standard works upon palaeography and diplomatics explain the forms of letters used at various times and in various countries. The materials employed, the form of the manuscript, the ink, the seals, the wrapper, and all other external facts have been so exhaustively classified that the expert can determine with considerable assurance the somxe of a written document. If it is a forgery, it is more than likely to contain slips in the imitation which will hardly escape detection in due time. The difficulty of discovery increases in proportion to the nearness of the forgery to the time or place of alleged origin, for the counterfeiter is then able to enter more fully into the spirit of the period.^ The invention of printing did not destroy the possibiHty of fraud in

^ See below, p. 44.

Forgery.

History of Croyland.

manuscript, for many public and private documents remain permanently written. The increasing rarity of ancient manuscripts, on the one hand, has furnished temptation to fabricate them for purposes of gain, and, on the other hand, the inducements to forge legal documents are so great that the act has to be repressed by the criminal laws of every country today.

The fabrication en bloc of an extensive historical work has not been common. One is more hkely to meet with shorter portions of history, memoirs, biographies, or letters which are doubtful. Furthermore, a large amount of the material now known to be false does not pretend to be original handwriting, but rather copied from manuscripts said to be no longer extant. The risk of immediate discovery is much less when the writer alleges that he had access to originals now lost or destroyed. Whether the document assumes to be original or not the proof of genuineness is not limited to the palseographical data, but the textual evidence of language, of formalities, and of statement must also be employed.

A pertinent example of the forgery of local annals is found in the history of Croyland Abbey. This purports to be a clu'onicle of that monastery by a Norman abbot named Ingulphus, covering about the period 625-1089, and embellished with numerous charters and privileges. Although exception had been taken earher to certain parts, the work as a whole was accepted as authentic history up to the second quarter of the nineteenth century. Since that time the earher part of the cln-onicle has been proved to be a forgery of the thirteenth or fourteenth centmy. The method used in reaching this conclusion is interesting and instructive.^

Of this histor}^ no manuscript earHer than the sixteenth century is in existence, and no original manuscript can be proved to have existed at any time, although writers of the seventeenth centiu-y claimed to have seen an autograph, which was afterward destroyed by fire. Consequently, no palseograpliic tests could be used in modern times and the external facts about the document had to be proved by study of the contents. Suspicion first laid hold of the charters quoted in the work. It was observed that Latin terms were frequently employed which came into use one or two centiu*ies later than the alleged dates of the documents. Closer analysis showed that there were attributed to the Anglo- Saxons not only words, but institutions, which are otherwise known to have been first introduced by the Normans. The writers made use of feudal terms unknown in Britain before the conquest, and these words, moreover, were placed in charters alleged to be of an early Saxon period. In most cases the documents were brought forward by the author to show the great antiquity of the property rights and privileges of the monastery, but they contained

H. T. Riley, The History and Charters of Ingulphus. Royal Archaeol. Inst, of Great Britain, Archaeol. Journal, XIX, 32- 49, 114-133, London, 1862. Dictionary of National Biography 'ingulf."

expressions like miles meus, my knight; manserium, manor; feudum, fief; and many others which were not used at the alleged date.

Anachronisms. At fost it was believed that the charters alone were

spurious while the liistory could be regarded as authentic, but this view has long been abandoned, for the chronicle itself is full of anachronisms. It appears to be based on a part of the work of Ordericus Vitalis, one of the liistorians of the Norman Conquest, who visited Croyland in the early part of the twelfth century. His meagre outhne was filled out with supposititious details, and wherever he suggests a possible occurrence the writers of Ingulphus supplied it. AVhenever they strayed away from Ordericus they invented most marvelous tales, but at the same time they committed most egregious blunders in chronology. For example, to bridge over the period covering the a]:)bey's foundation, the Danish invasion, and the election of the famous abbot Turketel, 948, the \\Titers supplied a series of superannuated monks, called Sempects, who live in the house to the improbable ages of one hundred and sixty-eight, one hundred and forty-two, one hundred and fifteen, and one hundred and twenty years respectively. Turketel himself is spoken of as the king^s chancellor and made responsible for the appointment of seven bishops on a certain day, when, in fact, the synod at which this occurred was held two years before Tm^ketel was born. Another passage states that the ''King's Justiciars'' held court at Stamford in 1075. Such an official act is not otherwise heard of for at least a hundred years after that date. A

"vicarius'' or vicar of a church is mentioned equally in advance of the age when the term was customary.

Many other citations might be made to multiply Object of t these misstatements and anaclironisms which show Forgery, that the wiiters built upon and borrowed much of their narrative from late chroniclers like Hemy of Huntingdon, Florence of Worcester, or Simeon of Durham. The motive of the forgery is clear. The monks desired to enforce their claims to property rights in dispute, and for that purpose prepared these alleged ancient charters, which they said were copied • from originals no longer in existence. In order to reinforce the case they prepared also tliis history in which the claims are mentioned and incorporated, but they could not put themselves back into the spirit of the earlier ages. Words and expressions which were as second nature to themselves were transplanted into Anglo-Saxon times, while dates were confused and impossibilities asserted. From the character of the document the forgery has been placed either in the fourteenth or fifteenth century. How far it succeeded in deceiving the immediate contemporaries we may not say, but for several hundred years afterward the work was accepted as a genuine product of the eleventh centm-y.

Forgeries of extensive annals and diaries have appeared from time to time throughout mediaeval and modern history. The motives are chiefly two, "^literary notoriety or desire of gain. To be the finder and editor of a manuscript hitherto unknown and casting light on hitherto obscure portions of history is a coveted position. This led to frequent imitations during the epoch of the humanists, notwithstanding the fact that the same period discovered many earher frauds of venerable growth. The money value of ancient manuscripts has led to several notorious forgeries in the nineteenth century. The clever work of one Simonides, who pretended to have discovered in an eastern monastery most extraordinary manuscripts on Egyptian history, was accepted for a time by the liighest experts. So long as human frailty exists, perhaps, we may look for such attacks •on public credulity. The experiments will take new forms with each generation. Quite recently a printed book appeared under the title "An Englishman in Paris.'' The volume purported to be the memou's of Sir William Wallace, at one time English ambassador in France. The work was so well done that considerable time elapsed before it could be proved that Sir William Wallace had left no such papers and that the memoirs were fabricated by a Reasons for Dutch newspaper man. The public reads with Success of For- g^^^^l^y the genuine memoirs of statesmen and

prominent persons like Talleyrand, Metternich, or Grant. Personal history, intimate conversations, hitherto secret details are sought for about every public man, and, doubtless, so long as these are expected the forger will supply them after death. In modern times, however, the supply of documentary evidence is so voluminous that detection is certain to follow soon, and the public is obliged to get this kind of amusement from books which are avowedly historical fiction. Briefer documents, like letters, charters, decrees, the acts of courts, councils or lynods, and business contracts in general were abricated in great numbers during the middle ages. The question of genuineness will arise before the itudent in many of these 3^et. The reasons for the tstonisliing productivity of thoge centuries in base naterial will be discussed more appropriately later )n^ yet the kinds of fraud to be guarded against in locumentary sources and some of the reasons for suspicion may be briefly suggested through studies )f familiar cases.

Among the most famous examples of forgery was Donation of he so-called Donation of Constantine. This docu- Constantme. nent alleged that the Emperor Constantine had p"anted to the bishops of Rome supreme authority )ver all chm*ches in the world and temporal authorty over Italy, or the rest of the western world, [n token of this the emperor had removed his own capital to Constantinople. Various other privileges symbolical of this supremacy were granted to the papal chak at the same time, and additions appeared it intervals in later ages. Although this document oaust have been written in the eighth century the contents were never seriously contested until the ifteenth centiu^y, w^hen three scholars fell upon it at :)nce. Other centuries passed, however, before the belief was finally abandoned.