The New Teaching of History: With a reply to some recent criticisms of The Outline of History — John Shaqi
The New Teaching of History: With a reply to some recent criticisms of The Outline of HistoryWells, H. G. (Herbert George)
History
The New Teaching of History: With a reply to some recent criticisms of The Outline of History
Wells, H. G. (Herbert George)
History -- Study and teaching; Wells, H. G. (Herbert George), 1866-1946. Outline of history
And first we may note how swift and supple is the mind that has Greek
grammar for its sustenance. It is not necessary for a classical scholar
to read either the beginning or the end of the work with which he deals.
It is not necessary to comprehend its aim and scope. He just takes up
the part dealing with his classical knowledge—which is indeed the only
knowledge that matters—and looks for mistakes or, what are really worse
than mistakes, things he does not understand and opinions he does not
share. And then he writes “Indeed!” or repeats a sentence with a note of
interrogation and a grand air of refutation. If Mr. Gomme has looked at
all at the end of _The Outline of History_ it was, I believe, to consult
the list of errata and make sure that nothing in the way of a
misspelling, a wrong date or misplaced title had been overlooked.
Because he gives no quarter in that respect. He is determined to make
the worst of things. He has just nosed through the few parts that matter
to him, he has scored it heavily with pencil; one can almost see his
notes of exclamation, his “No!” his “Did he _not_?” in the margin, and
then he has written up these marginal comments and rushed into print
with them. His aim was to accumulate as much apparent error as he could
to discredit _The Outline of History_, and he has industriously done his
best.
This close-reading method of Mr. Gomme has made him, I hope, one of the
most unteachable readers that the _Outline_ has had. I cannot complain
of his failure to grasp the importance of print to the human mind and
its bearing upon the political future of our race, nor of his foolish
footnote on that matter (p. 85), because these are novel ideas for his
type and his type is incapable of novel ideas; nor will I complain of
the invincible ignorance of ethnology he has preserved, in spite of the
clear and simple chapter I have given, but I do find it disappointing
that he should repeat the vulgar error that the Roman Empire at the
height of its power “united most of the known world.” I have been at
particular pains in the _Outline_ to dispel this preposterous idea, so
misleading and now so dangerous to Europeans. I have not merely stated
the facts, but given a special map which I had imagined would bring home
to the weakest intelligence the fact that, contemporary with this Roman
Empire, there was in Asia an Empire greater in extent, better organised
(as its drive against the Huns shows), and in very many respects more
civilised. But manifestly I had not reckoned with Mr. Gomme. He took up
the _Outline_ not to learn, but to carp; and he has learnt nothing.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account