EDITOR’S PREFACE 
later. But they also belong to that constructive process by which 
history passes from analysis to synthesis. The process is a long 
and difficult one, however, and work upon it has only just begun. 
To quote an apt characterization, in the first stages of a history 
like this one is only ‘ picking cotton’. The tangled threads of 
events have still to be woven into the pattern of history ; and for 
this creative and constructive work different plans and organiza- 
tions may be needed. 
In a work which is the product of so complex and varied 
co-operation as this, it is impossible to indicate in any but 
a most general way the apportionment of responsibility of editors 
and authors for the contents of the different monographs. For 
the plan of the History as a whole and its effective execution the 
General Editor is responsible ; but the arrangement of the detailed 
programmes of study has been largely the work of the different 
Editorial Boards and divisional Editors, who have also read the 
manuscripts prepared under their direction. The acceptance of 
a monograph in this series, however, does not commit the editors 
to the opinions or conclusions of the authors. Like other editors, 
they are asked to veuch for the scientific merit, the appropriate- 
ness and usefulness of the volumes admitted to the series; but 
the authors are naturally free to make their individual contribu- 
tions in their own way. In like manner the publication of the 
monographs does not commit the Endowment ta agreement 
with any specific conclusions which may be expressed therein. 
The responsibility of the Endowment is to History itself—an 
obligation not to avoid but to secure and preserve variant narra- 
tives and points of view, in so far as they are essential for the 
understanding of the War as a whole. 
J T S.