第50章

AsoundUtilitarianmightbeexpectedtomakethepropercompromise。Noonecouldbemoreonhisguardagainsttheerrorofsubordinatingtruthtopoeticfancy。Buthewouldnotdenytheimportanceofsomuchimaginativesympathyasisimpliedinaclearapprehensionofthementalandmoralconditionofpastepochs。HemightfindasufficientsubstituteforthedangerousfacultyofpicturesqueimaginationinthemoresoberfacultywhichGrotepossessed——massivecommonsense；the’knowledgeofhumannature，’asitiscalled，whichcorrespondsnottopoeticimaginationortoasetofestablishedformulae，buttothepracticalinsightacquiredbyintimateacquaintancewithactualaffairs。IfGrotewasabletorivalortosurpassGermanprofessorsontheirownground，itwasbecausehiswantofsomeoftheirspecialtrainingwasmorethancounterbalancedbyhisexperienceofbusinessandpubliclife。InThreadneedleStreetandatWestminsterhehadacquiredaninstinctiveperceptionwhichservedhimindescribingthepoliticalandeconomicalconditionsofAthenianlife。Whenjoinedwithanardourforresearchthatpowergaveavaluetohisjudgmentsoffactwhichenabledhimtowriteamodelhistory。

The’graphic’or’artistic’typeofhistorymaybeobjectionable；isnotthephilosophicalworse？Nothingdistortsfactssomuchastheory；andascientifichistorianshouldbeonhisguardagainstthephilosopherofallmen。Buthowtodrawtheline？Sticktobarefactandyoucanonlywriteannals。Historyproperbeginsasyouintroducecausation，andthemereseriesistransformedintoaprocess。Itisimpossibletogetabarefactwithoutsomeadmixtureoftheory。TheUtilitarianprinciple，again，suggeststherightaim。Itexcludesthemischievousdidacticismofolderhistorians。Thequestionoffactmusteverywhereprecedethequestionofright。Inpolitics，economicsandethicsBenthamandMalthusandtheMillshadinvariousrelationsappliedtheprinciplewhichappliesequallytohistory，ThehistorianmayadoptSpinoza’sgreatsaying。Hisbusinessistounderstand，nottoapproveordenounce。AhistoriantreatsofsomegreateventsuchastheFrenchrevolution。Hisonelegitimateanddominantpurposeshouldbetoexplainitscauses，andheshouldinquirewithabsoluteimpartialityhowitcametopass，notwhetheritwasrightorwrong。Theoldmethodofwritinghistoryattributedeventstoindividuals，andconsistentlyappliedamoralestimate。Iftheactionofthisorthatman，MirabeauorRobespierre，wastheultimatecauseoftheevents，wemayaskwhethertheactionwasgoodorbad，andinferthattheeventoughtoroughtnottohavehappened。ThescientificviewfixesattentionsimplyOnthecauses。Whatweretheconditionswhichdeterminedtheevent？Wemustinquireasimpartiallyasapathologistexaminingthecausesofadisease。

Thecategoryofcausationisthesolecategoryrelevant。Ethicaljudgmentsmayfollow：wemaydecidethatcertainprocessesimpliedprogressordecay；wemaygoontojudgeoftheindividuals，makingallowancefortheirmotivesafterestimatingwhatviewofthefactswaspossibleforthem，andweshallgenerallyfindthatthereweregoodmenandbadmenonbothsides，andthatitisoutofplacetoapplysuchwordsasrightorwrongtotheeventsthemselves。Themoralquestionistransferredtoanothersphere，andhumanconductistreatedasacaseofnaturalcausation。ThismethodisimpliedintheveryconceptionofscientifichistoryandwasfullyinaccordancewithUtilitarianism。Menhadbeencomplainingoftheinadequacyoftheoldhistory，whichdealtexclusivelywithpoliticalintriguesandthemilitaryincidents。Ashistorybecamemorescientificthenecessityofattendingtosocialconditionswasdailymoreevident，thoughtheextentofthechangeimpliedisscarcelyevenyetrealised。Thehistory，forexample，ofpoliticalorreligiouschangescannotbefullywrittenwithoutreferencetotheeconomicconditionsofthecountry，andwholesystemsofinvestigationarerequisitebeforethoseconditionscanbetolerablyunderstood。

NothingcouldbemoreinaccordancewithUtilitarianismthanathoroughacceptanceofthisview。Nor，again，shouldanymenhavebeenmorefreefromthetemptationofallowingaprioritheoriesandhastygeneralisationstocolourtheirviewoffacts。Thetrueattitudeofthehistoricalinqu