CHAPTER XV CRITICISM AND INTERPRETATION OF RECORDS It is possible to define and separate the various processes of the mind when engaged in historical research. We may mark the point where in theory the qualification of the source is adjudicated and where the judgment of truth begins, but in reality these actions occur simultaneously, or in such rapid succession that we arrive at a general conclusion along several lines at almost the same instant. It is for that reason, and to avoid repetition, that this book has brought together procedures which theoretically might be separated into internal criticism and interpretation. Where the material crosses the line between consciously transmitted history and relics, that is to say, where it is conscious in part and unconscious in part, like a monument with an inscription, there is danger that the properties of each division will get confused in the search for truth. The study of this border material demands that the parts be strictly defined before judgment. Whether on a monument or on a parchment, the investigator should clearly determine in his own mind which part of the document is unconscious testimony. That part which evidently intends to convey an historical record must be judged by the rules of conscious authorship. The foregoing brief study contains the elements of the method which must be applied alike to monuments and records, so far as they are dependent upon individuality, time, and place. The materials which may be classed with relics in the larger sense are subject to considerations which follow. Documents which are distinctly relics of their Public Docuepoch may for sake of convenience be grouped in ments. two large classes, public and private. Even under such a broad classification there will be found much crossing of lines. In one sense all are relics, like the arrowhead or the coin, but, on the other hand, the source of the document has much to do with its valuation. For the sake of clearness it seems best to treat of the written relic quite apart from the handiwork of man, because the conscious part is so likely to spring out of the record at any moment; yet the method which should apply to the relic must be closely followed, and the applications of the principles to certain classes of material are now in order, first in respect to public documents. Since history concerns itself so much with governments and public affairs it naturally follows that official documents occupy a large place in the labors of the historical student. In fact, no class of material is more abundant than this, since it includes the transactions of every sort of public authority, from parliament to town meeting, or from kings to constables, and the more modern the period the greater the amount. To give a list of these sources alone Legislative would require a volume, and to give an analysis of every kind of available public document would far exceed the scope of this work; yet a brief characterization of various classes of this material will serve in a measure to point out the relative value of each, and for that purpose the division of the powers of government into legislative, executive, and judicial will afford a convenient order of consideration. For purposes of interpretation, legislative records fall into two classes, first, the statutes enacted, and, second, the records of discussion and information which preceded. In the one class are found the United States Statutes, and in the other the Congressional Record; the Statutes of the Realm supplemented by the Journals of the House of Commons; or the session laws of a state legislature compared with its journals. The law enacted, or the international treaty agreed upon, is not necessarily the embodiment of pure justice or the ideal solution of the problem. It is rather the result at that time obtainable through a compromise among divergent opinions and interests. It is a relic of the prevailing conditions of the politics and society of its day. The process by which this compromised result was attained is found in the minutes of proceedings, and in this record the investigator also expects to find the motives under which the law-makers acted. He will probably find there the alleged motive at least, but this is by no means uniformly certain, since records of parliamentary debates vary greatly in completeness. It may be necessary to search outside of these documents to find the true motives behind the transaction, for it is safe to assume that a law or a resolution of a public body was not made for the sole benefit of future historians. These actions were taken to establish a legal relation, or to bring about an immediate condition. To avoid disputes an exact copy of the act was recorded and printed, or placed where it might be consulted. The record of proceedings is intended to show that the law was passed by the proper number of votes, or according to established rules, and secondarily to give the reasons for its adoption. It cannot be said that the future is left entirely out of consideration, for legislators usually are looking for justification more or less remote. It may be at the hands of their party at the next election, or it may be in the esteem of posterity, but the minutes of discussion will be likely to show the reasons which the enactors wished to be considered their motives. If these were in reality base or venial, the fact is not likely to appear in the official record. Sometimes the reasons for an act are given in the The Preamble. title or preamble of the document itself. In that case it is necessary to make a clear distinction between the two parts. The act is the relic of the time, the unconscious testimony of the period, while the preamble is the consciously transmitted account to be judged by conditions of personality. Thus the law of Henry VIII for the abolition of monasteries, 1536, begins with an elaborate preamble, as follows: "Forasmuch as manifested sin, vicious, carnal and abominable living is daily used and committed among the little and small Abbeys, Priories and other religious houses of Monks, Canons and Nuns where the congregation of such religious persons is under the number of twelve persons, whereby the governors of such religious houses and their convent spoil destroy consume and utterly waste, as well as their churches, monasteries priories principal houses, farm granges, lands tenements and hereditaments, as the ornaments of their churches their goods and cattle, to the high displeasure of Almighty God and to the great infamy of the Kings Highness and the Realm if redress should not be had thereof; and albeit that many continual visitations hath been heretofore had the space of two hundred years and more, for an honest and charitable reformation of such unthrifty carnal and abominable living, yet nevertheless little or none amendment is hitherto had, but their vicious living shamelessly increaseth and augmenteth," etc.1 This was the justification put forward by the lawmakers in advance of their drastic procedure. Mr. Froude was satisfied with such testimony to the superior motives of Henry VIII in destroying religious foundations, but most investigators will require other evidence of the truth of the allegations put forward. Indeed, the weight of testimony is much against the disinterestedness of that sovereign in the whole transaction. No historian of the present generation would be guilty of the avowal that he believed these allegations because they were to be found in the Statutes of the Realm. The habit of classifying materials and of distinguishing between the various parts of such a document will go far to prevent errors of judgment upon facts. 1 Statutes of the Realm, 27 Hen. VIII, c. 28. |