Historical and political subjects in the contemporary era

History is not written for frivolous and flighty people, and the first duty of every honest historian is to delve as deeply as possible into research, to disdain no document, and to correct himself as many times as necessary. Accuracy is a form of literary probity and must extend even to the smallest details, for how can one have authority in great matters if one is forgetful and negligent in small ones? No one is responsible for involuntary mistakes; but whoever knowingly allows an error to stand, however slight it may seem, does not deserve to be called a serious writer. […] Nor do I wish to conceal my former opinion, nor to present my current one as infallible, unafraid of the childish fear—unworthy of History—of appearing to contradict myself.
Marcelino Menéndez Pelayo

In 1910, shortly before his death and at the height of his intellectual maturity, Marcelino Menéndez Pelayo wrote, in the “Preliminary Warning” to a revised History of the Spanish Heterodox (whose first edition had appeared between 1882 and 1883), his conception of the historian’s task: constant research, the search through documents, attention and fidelity to facts, and the revision of his own work and opinions, if necessary, as a result of new data and greater and better knowledge of the subject.

From then until now, historical studies have advanced greatly: a larger body of materials, new research tools, mechanization, digitization, the presence of artificial intelligence… There are new objects of study, new interests, new trends, and new approaches.

But the substance of Don Marcelino’s words remains: honesty in inquiry, deep and meticulous research, attention to every detail, accuracy in recording them, the ability to acknowledge one’s own errors, constant and sincere self-correction. All this is what anyone who approaches historical studies must contribute in order to continue advancing—together with many others, in intellectual collaboration—in that collective endeavor which is the knowledge of who we are and who we have been.

Let us hope—indeed, we do hope—that the works gathered here are worthy of Don Marcelino’s legacy; that they fulfill the obligations Menéndez Pelayo set forth with such clarity and integrity back in 1910, in an edition of a work that was, in many respects, a correction of himself.

Borja Rodríguez Gutiérrez
President of the Menéndez Pelayo Society

History is not written for frivolous and flighty people, and the first duty of every honest historian is to delve as deeply as possible into research, to disdain no document, and to correct himself as many times as necessary. Accuracy is a form of literary probity and must extend even to the smallest details, for how can one have authority in great matters if one is forgetful and negligent in small ones? No one is responsible for involuntary mistakes; but whoever knowingly allows an error to stand, however slight it may seem, does not deserve to be called a serious writer. […] Nor do I wish to conceal my former opinion, nor to present my current one as infallible, unafraid of the childish fear—unworthy of History—of appearing to contradict myself.
Marcelino Menéndez Pelayo

In 1910, shortly before his death and at the height of his intellectual maturity, Marcelino Menéndez Pelayo wrote, in the “Preliminary Warning” to a revised History of the Spanish Heterodox (whose first edition had appeared between 1882 and 1883), his conception of the historian’s task: constant research, the search through documents, attention and fidelity to facts, and the revision of his own work and opinions, if necessary, as a result of new data and greater and better knowledge of the subject.

From then until now, historical studies have advanced greatly: a larger body of materials, new research tools, mechanization, digitization, the presence of artificial intelligence… There are new objects of study, new interests, new trends, and new approaches.

But the substance of Don Marcelino’s words remains: honesty in inquiry, deep and meticulous research, attention to every detail, accuracy in recording them, the ability to acknowledge one’s own errors, constant and sincere self-correction. All this is what anyone who approaches historical studies must contribute in order to continue advancing—together with many others, in intellectual collaboration—in that collective endeavor which is the knowledge of who we are and who we have been.

Let us hope—indeed, we do hope—that the works gathered here are worthy of Don Marcelino’s legacy; that they fulfill the obligations Menéndez Pelayo set forth with such clarity and integrity back in 1910, in an edition of a work that was, in many respects, a correction of himself.