The category of causation is the sole category relevant.Ethical judgments may follow:we may decide that certain processes implied progress or decay;we may go on to judge of the individuals,making allowance for their motives after estimating what view of the facts was possible for them,and we shall generally find that there were good men and bad men on both sides,and that it is out of place to apply such words as right or wrong to the events themselves.The moral question is transferred to another sphere,and human conduct is treated as a case of natural causation.This method is implied in the very conception of scientific history and was fully in accordance with Utilitarianism.Men had been complaining of the inadequacy of the old history,which dealt exclusively with political intrigues and the military incidents.As history became more scientific the necessity of attending to social conditions was daily more evident,though the extent of the change implied is scarcely even yet realised.The history,for example,of political or religious changes cannot be fully written without reference to the economic conditions of the country,and whole systems of investigation are requisite before those conditions can be tolerably understood.
Nothing could be more in accordance with Utilitarianism than a thorough acceptance of this view.Nor,again,should any men have been more free from the temptation of allowing a priori theories and hasty generalisations to colour their view of facts.The true attitude of the historical inquirer should be that which was illustrated in science by Darwin.On the one side,he must collect as large as possible a store of facts,observed as impartially and accurately as possible.On the other side,he must be constantly but cautiously generalising;endeavouring to fit the facts in their true order;to discover what formulae serve to 'colligate'them satisfactorily;and always to assign causes which are both real and adequate,such that their existence can be verified,and that,if they exist,they will fit into a reasoned theory.But his theories must be tentative and liable to constant revision.They may be suggestive even if not established,but in so complex an inquiry they must be regarded as being only a relative or approximate truth.
Briefly,then,the historian should aim at providing materials for a 'sociology,'but be on his guard against supposing for a moment that such a science now exists or can ever be raised to a level with the fully developed sciences.The word corresponds to an ideal aim,not to an established fact.It is important to regard history scientifically,though we cannot hope for a complete science of history.It simply means that we must regard the history of man as the history of the gradual development of the individual and of society by forces dimly perceived,not capable of accurate measurement,but yet working regularly and involving no abrupt or discontinuous intervention.
If Grote's history be really a 'model,'it was because he virtually accepted such limitations.Historians should admit that they are still in the stage of collecting the facts upon which any wide generalisations are still premature.Grote was a student of philosophy;he had,like Mill,been impressed by Comte,though he never,like Mill,took Comte for a prophet.He discussed early beliefs and institutions,and he certainly supposed his history to have important political implications.But a cautious intellect and a desire for a solid groundwork of fact restrained him from excessive theorising,and prevented his prejudices from overpowering his candour.So far,he represented the best Utilitarian spirit,and obeyed what was,or at least should have been,their essential canon:to make sure of your facts before you lay down your theories.They wished to apply scientific methods to history,as to law,political economy,ethics,and psychology:and,upon their view,the first condition of success was a sufficient accumulation of facts.Yet,as has abundantly appeared,they had been little disposed to confine themselves to this preliminary stage.They were too ready to assume that the sciences could be constituted off hand,and to accept convenient postulates as absolute truths.They had not only pointed out,but taken possession of,the promised land.Their premature dogmatism showed the weakness of their trusting their assumptions.The result to philosophy of history may be illustrated from the remarkable writer,who,in the period of Mill's philosophic supremacy,attempted to lay its foundation.
III.HENRY THOMAS BUCKLE
Henry Thomas Buckle (1821-1862)represents this aspiration by his History of Civilization in England.
