APPENDIX I 
NOTES ON METHOD 
Historical Method vs. Historical Narrative 
It is almost an axiom nowadays that “the present can be 
understood only with reference to the past.” The general 
acceptance of this phrase is supposed to mark the triumph 
of the historical spirit and correlatively of the historical 
method. If this were true it would mean undoubtedly a 
great scientific advance. But to what extent is it true? Is 
there ground for the belief that the historical spirit and 
method, scientifically speaking, are comprehended by any 
large proportion of contemporary scholars and teachers? 
Are not the most evident results of the apparent dominance 
of the new ideal, at least in economics and closely allied 
disciplines, a great deal of misdirected and barren historical 
reading, and much indiscriminate indulgence in mere his 
torical narrative? 
As things go now, if a general theory of economics is to 
be exploited, it must be preceded by chapters on the de 
velopment of English industry from the middle ages ; if 
the discussion is one concerning capital and its uses, it 
must begin with an erudite consideration of the etymological 
development of terms; if a class is to be set to study con 
temporary municipal problems, it must first be made to drag 
slowly through the history of European municipalities ; if a 
student undertakes to treat critically or constructively a 
bit of current theory he is likely to be regarded as un 
scientific and unscholarly if he fails first to read and sum- 
376