Ohio History Journal

THE STUDY OF HISTORY--A HINDRANCE OR A HELP

IN THE PERFECTING OF INTERNATIONAL

ORGANIZATION

 

By K. C. LEEBRICK

 

This statement was made by Nicholas Murray Butler at the

184th Commencement of Columbia University, June 1, 1938:

Ideas and principles, as well as kings, can abdicate. There are many

disturbing signs--and not in Europe or in Asia alone--that Democracy is

moving, in no small measure unconsciously, toward abdication. The long

and steady progress of democratic principles and ideals which had continued

for some three hundred years and which the Great World War was to de-

fend and to establish firmly forever, has all too plainly been brought to a

halt.

This serves as well as any statement I know to call our atten-

tion to the serious situation as it exists at the present time and

has existed for the past few years.

Lola Best Covey in discussing the teaching of international

relations and international cooperation stated that:

The schools have no more gigantic task than the teaching of inter-

national relations and international cooperation. But what, now, will teachers

teach? Will they turn their backs on the need for a concerted program

among nations? Will they fear to teach international cooperation, lest their

teaching be interpreted as sympathy with causes other than American

causes? Or will teachers still feel that they have a contribution to make to

the world community that must express itself in terms other than of hate?

I am aware that the teacher's role is a negligible one in changing the

course of international relations. That is the work of warriors, statesmen

and philosophers. But that much remains to be done in teaching America's

youth to accept changes in the course of international relations without

losing their faith in democracy and world cooperation, I am also aware.

And that is the task of the teacher.

Just this week I received a letter from Mrs. K. Capper-

Johnson, wife of a former colleague of mine in international rela-

tions at Syracuse. They are members of the Friends Church and

had returned to England a number of years ago. We wrote offer-

ing to take care of their son for the duration of the war if they

(269)

• 1
 

270    OHIO ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND HISTORICAL QUARTERLY

 

felt that that was the proper thing to do. She wrote declining.

In her letter she summed up the situation as she saw it from her

position in England:

What vast changes will have come about in our own lives and in

National and International life before we rid ourselves of violence and

society then foster the endless and incomparable beauty of the Heavens and

the earth, but that, as I see it, can only be done through not "going back"

but going forward to a far simpler way of life enriched by experience and

knowledge--not the old enforced simplicity of poverty but that based on the

convictions which Jesus so ably set forth in his lifetime.

The work to be done after the war will be of far greater magnitude

than now, in war time. That is why one goes on hoping that the war will

not go on until our energies and initiative are sapped.

These quotations have been used to call our attention to the

fact that there is a crisis which needs to be considered by all

teachers of social science and, of course, especially by those of

us who have in some way been responsible for the teaching of

history and for the preservation of records.

The study of history has been under attack in many sources.

I need not recall to you the classical remark of a great automobile

manufacturer to the effect that the study of history was a waste

of time. Those of us who have been trained in history have a

feeling that a careful study of the past, and an analysis of the

way people have lived, and the rise and fall of civilizations, and

the success and failure of various social experiments is an ex-

cellent preparation for public life. Among us there are those who

feel that a study of history is one of the soundest methods of

education and that it helps us to avoid mistakes of the past and

helps us to try not to repeat things that have already been tried

and found to be unsatisfactory. Those of us who feel this way

do not, therefore, apologize for being historians, whether we are

professional or amateur, teachers, or just interested readers of

history in various forms.

Recent events in Europe, and even in this country, have

again challenged the field of history as a study. In general, I do

not feel that these criticisms or challenges are merited. Those who

really know European history and have a general acquaintance

with ancient and medieval history that precedes the modern period

• 2
 

OHIO HISTORY CONFERENCE, 1941            271

 

certainly have a better understanding of what is going on in

Europe today than those who know only contemporary American

events, or, in a more general way, the events taking place in the

present international arena.

It is my considered judgment that a person who carefully

reads history and who has sufficient training so that he can read

understandingly and also exercise reasonable criticism has a much

better guide to the future than the individual who only reads

about contemporary situations.

For instance, the publication in the recent White Book of

the documents reputed to be found in Poland, by the Germans,

is nothing new to the person who has a sound foundation in

history. With the arrival of the White Book in this country

textual and other criticisms will help us to determine whether

this is manufactured propaganda or whether it has a real basis

in actual valid documents. As an aside, I may say that the manu-

facture of documents that would fool even the experts is not

confined to this period. There are many instances in history of

successful counterfeiting.

From these remarks it would appear this is to be a "love

feast" and that I am gently stroking the backs of those of you

who are historians and trying to justify myself for once having

been a professor of modern European history.

Without invalidating what I have just said, I do want to

challenge a number of things that have been done in the name

of history and perhaps criticize teaching methods or subject matter.

History is one of the easiest tools to be used by a totalitarian

government to justify its ends. Frederick the Great, when told

that clear historical title to Silesia had not been found, remarked

to the effect that "I will first conquer and you will thereafter

justify the acquisition." We have seen an example of this re-

cently in some of Hitler's statements regarding Czechoslovakia,

Danzig and, most recently, Poland. Even Russia's recent creation

of the Karelian-Finnish Soviet is an attempt to justify by history

what might equally well be called imperialistic expansion, with or

without justification.

Since we have mentioned Hitler and Stalin, we should state

• 3
 

272   OHIO ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND HISTORICAL QUARTERLY

 

that examples could be found from the Allied Western Powers

and even here in our own country.

Almost every country in the teaching of history uses the

motif of glorifying the history of its people, and its government

and making its nation as glorious as possible. This to the end

that patriotism will be created, also an apartness, an aloofness, a

separateness will be realized in relation to other peoples. You

will recall that in the first contact with the government of China

representatives of the western nations had to kowtow to the

emperor, who considered himself superior to all other rulers. This

is an extreme form, but we all know that this is an attitude that

most of our histories try to create in this and in every other

country. We find it in its most extreme form in Germany today.

They have returned to the primitive idea of a superior race or a

chosen people of God, not in this instance referring necessarily

to the Christian God. They are again emphasizing the idea used

by the Romans that certain people are destined to rule and that

others are barbarians, or inferiors, whose destiny is to be deter-

mined by the superior or destined people. We find this use of

history also in Russia where the attempt is to glorify a social or

economic philosophy and to justify the rule of those in power,

even to the extent of destroying and discrediting much of the

historical past of the nation and to repudiating the religious back-

ground of the people.

Some of you are now wondering whether I am criticizing

the use of history to teach patriotism. What I am criticizing is

the creating of a false patriotism. I believe it is time to teach

history so that we can understand our Nation in the present and

base our future in relation to other nations, with the recognition

that we live with other nations and that international associations

must function if we are to continue to have separate nations. We

know that certain of the nations of the world today are trying

to establish empires to dominate a large part of a continent or

the world. Those of us who have read history know that this

is not a first attempt and have some judgment as to the probable

success or failure, over a period of time, of these most recent

endeavors.

• 4
 

OHIO HISTORY CONFERENCE, 1941          273

I believe that it is possible to teach history, even in the public

schools of the United States, without creating a hatred for

England, as was done to a greater extent when I was in the public

schools than it is today. An analysis of our text-books shows that

we still make slighting remarks about the English, the Canadians,

the Japanese, the Mexicans. One of the purported causes of the

Japanese attack on China is that they are trying to eliminate from

the Chinese text-books material which the Japanese feel is too

critical of them.

President Houck of the University of Maine made a careful

study and analysis of the material in American text-books which

related to Canada. The result was not complimentary to the

United States or such as to promote good relations with Canada.

In my opinion it was inexcusable and certainly unjustifiable.

A number of years ago while studying in Seville, Spain, at

the Archives of the Indies, I attended a lecture by one of the

archivists and was astonished at the absurd idea of America that

was held by this otherwise well-educated and well-informed per-

son. This same experience has occurred to me in the Far East

and in other places in Europe.

It is a well-known fact that very little about America is

studied in European countries and what little is studied is mostly

misinformation. It was not until comparatively recently that any

of the universities in other countries gave courses on the United

States or other American countries. This certainly does not pro-

mote mutual understanding.

We of the United States probably study more about England,

France and Germany and Latin American countries and even the

Far East than do the students of any other country in the world.

Still my criticism is that we do not study the histories of our

neighbors fairly enough and to a sufficient extent to promote under-

standing.

There are people who would agree with me that the present

plight of the world is due, in part, to the doctrine of economic

self-sufficiency and of national aloofness. National sovereignty

is considered to be absolute or total. It is recognized that domestic

sovereignty is not complete within a nation but is only comparative.

• 5
 

274   OHIO ARCHEOLOGICAL AND HISTORICAL QUARTERLY

It should equally be recognized that the sovereignty of a nation,

large or small, is relative in relation to other nations and that there

is a community of interest, and that international trade and all in-

ternational agreements modify sovereignty, and that it is practically

impossible for any nation to be completely sovereign, whether at

home or in the international field. This doctrine is clearly demon-

strable by historical analysis. Its presentation in the teaching of

history would be more helpful than the implication that is gener-

ally given at the present time that the nation is completely sov-

ereign in the international field and can, at any time, remove itself

from international contacts. Most of us recognize that each nation

has obligations and relations and still in the teaching of history,

particularly in the elementary and secondary schools, we teach

history as though this country, or any other country, could stand

alone, and as though this country were always right and there

were not two sides to any of the past events, even the Revolution,

the War of 1812 and the War Between the States.

The teacher of English and the teacher of language have, in

some phases, done a better job in the teaching of history than

have we who have been responsible for the teaching of history.

One of the troubles has been that many of those who teach

language and literature have been without a sufficient basis in

history to do as well as they should in their own fields.

I am not one of those who feel that it is possible to create a

superstate so that the nations, as such, would disappear and be-

come simply states in a federated world government. I believe

that nations, as such, can exist and develop their own individuality

and maintain a form of government that is suitable to them and

desired by their people. It appears that it is even possible for

totalitarian and democratic states to exist together upon the earth

and that it is not a very great step to reach a spirit of tolerance,

which recognizes the right of a nation to exist and to work with

its own devices for solving its economic and defense problems.

History is guilty of throwing too much emphasis upon wars and

battle and military successes, and upon reigns of kings and queens,

whom they have surrounded with unmerited glamour. Very little

attention has been paid to the development of social institutions

• 6
 

OHIO HISTORY CONFERENCE, 1941             275

 

which help to solve the problem of peoples in learning how to

live together and to provide themselves with a better living. It

will be profitable for those of us who teach history to give at least

proportionate attention to the interdependence of the peoples of

the world upon economic resources, which are widely scattered.

We could devote at least some time to following the contributions

that the peoples of the various nations have made to the various

arts, sciences and to political science.

We all recognize that it is difficult in our elementary and

secondary schools for us to analyze Fascism or Naziism, and God

forbid that we try to teach anything about what is going on in

Russia. As sure as we do, some member of the community or

school board is sure to enter the picture and there is trouble ahead.

Not all is bad in Fascism or in other political experiments. My

judgment is that we should teach about these attempts of peoples

to solve their problems and that the children should learn about

them in a fairly unbiased manner, rather than get their informa-

tion from a soap-box orator, or a paid representative of another

government, or from a "parlor pink" who is well-intentioned but

frequently not too well informed.

While the first World War was on, H. G. Wells began writing

his Outline of History with the idea of minimizing the importance

of military successes and to create new heroes, who made contribu-

tions to society in other than military fields. There have been

many attempts since this effort of Wells' in the same direction

and, in part, they have been successful. Wells' characterization

of a great military figure as "a cockerel strutting on the dung

hill of civilization" is perhaps the best illustration from his book

to show us his objective. My feeling is that we need more of

this type of history.

There is some danger in the present tendency toward a unit

course in the social sciences. The students do not get enough of

history or political science. It may be that there is a need for

general or integrating courses for teachers who have to cover a

wide range. In my judgment, these courses should come after

the student has a reasonably comprehensive and firm foundation

in history and political science and perhaps sociology, etc., rather

• 7
 

276    OHIO ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND HISTORICAL QUARTERLY

 

than be taught as beginning or foundation courses. Teachers of

history and political science, therefore, need to restudy their texts

and reexamine their teaching so that the essentials are taught and

the non-essentials are eliminated; and that the history that is taught

be vivid and of such a nature that it gives the student a knowledge

and also a basis for comparison in the present as well as in the

past.

I close with the conviction that while some mistakes have

been made in the teaching of history as a basis for the bringing

about of international understanding, the mistakes have been

less serious than many imagine.     I have the conviction that a

knowledge of history, a firm foundation in the events of the past,

even if they are somewhat colored or somewhat distorted, give the

student or the possessor of this knowledge the best possible

foundation for orienting himself in the present and for planning

toward the future. You have all gathered that I am not only a

nationalist, but an internationalist in the sense that I feel that

the nations must be preserved, and that some sort of international

organization must be formed to preserve individual nations and

to make it possible for them to cooperate together for the advance-

ment of their mutual welfare. The historians can help to bring

this about more than any other informed people. These remarks,

therefore, are an appeal for the continuance of the teaching of

history and the dedication of teachers to the promotion of under-

standing between peoples within nations and between nations.

I wish to close with a hopeful message from Robert G. Sproul,

president of the University of California, who has long been a

personal friend and who was for many years a colleague:

No catastrophe can end human aspirations as long as there persist in

men and women the will to know the truth, the voice of conscience, and

the invincible spirit of faith. These are the very foundation of man's ex-

istence. All else, no matter how often torn down, man can rebuild. Those

who have had the privilege of education must cherish and defend these three

indispensable elements, insisting that faith and conscience shall be in-

formed by intelligence and that intelligence shall be ruled by conscience

and possessed by the spirit of faith.

• 8