History is an art, not a science, just as war is an art rather than a science. An historian would need all the facts to do history scientifically, and an infinite number of them slip away like tears in rain. Relatively few facts remain for the historian to work with, especially if they pertain to the woods east of Richmond or south of Petersburg.
As a practical matter, historians rarely use all the facts at their disposal. For example, as I write about June 22, 1864, I have access to at least a dozen diaries that I will probably not quote at all and may not even used in footnotes. They do not provide any enlightening details. Then there are the numerous accounts of the Yanks fleeing from the Confederate onslaught. I will probably not use them all. How many such accounts are necessary? At some point, one reaches the point of diminishing returns. Or take the Official Reports. Who uses every fact set forth therein? Nobody.
I used to think that writing history resembles assembling a puzzle, but like Leroy Brown's face, the puzzle has a couple of pieces gone. The problem with this analogy is that a puzzle, when assembled, provides a complete picture and includes everything. A more apt comparison is with a mosaic, where there are a lot of blank spaces between the shiny bits. Another apt comparison is with a pointillist painting, which has a substantial amount of canvas between the colorful dots. The art lies in the selection, organization and analysis of the shiny bits or colorful dots.
Then there is the drawing of conclusions from the facts, a totally different function. For example, Gibbon wrote a wonderful factual history of the decline and fall of the Roman Empire. Trouble is, he failed to draw the correct conclusions from the facts he established. He concluded that Rome fell because of barbarians and Christians. The facts show that Rome fell because it divided against itself, and a house divided cannot stand. The Romans faced worse in the third century A.D. than in the fifth, but in the third, even though they split in three, they all knew they belonged to one. When Aurelian reconquered the other two parts, the Empire was reunited. In the fifth century A.D., the Romans divided against themselves then sicced the barbarians on one another. The Western Romans even established barbarians in their territory.
The Romans essentially committed suicide for fear of dying.
As a practical matter, historians rarely use all the facts at their disposal. For example, as I write about June 22, 1864, I have access to at least a dozen diaries that I will probably not quote at all and may not even used in footnotes. They do not provide any enlightening details. Then there are the numerous accounts of the Yanks fleeing from the Confederate onslaught. I will probably not use them all. How many such accounts are necessary? At some point, one reaches the point of diminishing returns. Or take the Official Reports. Who uses every fact set forth therein? Nobody.
I used to think that writing history resembles assembling a puzzle, but like Leroy Brown's face, the puzzle has a couple of pieces gone. The problem with this analogy is that a puzzle, when assembled, provides a complete picture and includes everything. A more apt comparison is with a mosaic, where there are a lot of blank spaces between the shiny bits. Another apt comparison is with a pointillist painting, which has a substantial amount of canvas between the colorful dots. The art lies in the selection, organization and analysis of the shiny bits or colorful dots.
Then there is the drawing of conclusions from the facts, a totally different function. For example, Gibbon wrote a wonderful factual history of the decline and fall of the Roman Empire. Trouble is, he failed to draw the correct conclusions from the facts he established. He concluded that Rome fell because of barbarians and Christians. The facts show that Rome fell because it divided against itself, and a house divided cannot stand. The Romans faced worse in the third century A.D. than in the fifth, but in the third, even though they split in three, they all knew they belonged to one. When Aurelian reconquered the other two parts, the Empire was reunited. In the fifth century A.D., the Romans divided against themselves then sicced the barbarians on one another. The Western Romans even established barbarians in their territory.
The Romans essentially committed suicide for fear of dying.
No comments:
Post a Comment