The Transition in English Historical Writing 1760–1830 9780231897884

Citation preview

STUDIES IN HISTORY, ECONOMICS A N D PUBLIC LAW Edited by the FACULTY OF POLITICAL SCIENCE OF COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY

NUMBER 390

THE TRANSITION IN ENGLISH HISTORICAL WRITING 1760-1830 BY

THOMAS PRESTON PEARDON

T H E T R A N S I T I O N I N ENGLISH HISTORICAL W R I T I N G i760—i830

BY

THOMAS PRESTON PEARDON, PH.D. Imtructor in Barnard College Columbia Univtrtily

NEW

YORK

COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY PRESS L O N D O N : P . S. K I N G & SON, L T D .

1933

COPYRIGHT,

1933

BY COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY

PRESS

PRINTED IN THE UNITED STATES OK AMERICA

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS I am indebted chiefly to Professor Carlton J . H. Hayes who read my manuscript carefully and made many suggestions for improvement; to my wife, Celeste Comegys Peardon, for much assistance, especially in typing part of the manuscript and in reading proof; and to Mr. Hermann F. Robinton whose careful reading of the proof saved me from a number of errors both typographical and of a more serious kind. T o Professors Austin P. Evans, Hoxie N. Fairchild, Dixon Ryan Fox, William Haller, David S. Muzzey, Geroid T . Robinson and Robert Livingston Schuyler, I am also grateful for their criticism. It is only fair to add, however, that since I have not always adopted the suggestions I have received from those mentioned above, the responsibility for the facts and opinions in this monograph rests on me alone. 5

TABLE OF CONTENTS FAS«

CHAPTER I Introduction

9 CHAPTER

II

Rationalist History, 1780-1800 CHAPTER

34 III

Party History from H u m e to 1800 : The Tory Emphasis CHAPTER

69

IV

Signs of Change, 1760-1800: I, Primitivism CHAPTER

103

V

Signs of Change, 1760-1800: I I , Medievalism and Pietism CHAPTER

127

VI

T h e Rise of Nationalist History CHAPTER

161 VII

Party History from 1800 to 1827: The W h i g and Liberal Emphasis. CHAPTER

VIII

Romanticist History, 1800-1830 CHAPTER

214 IX

F r o m Roscoe to Lingard

.-. CHAPTER

183

253

X

T h e Change in Attitude Towards the Sources of National History. 284 BIBLIOGRAPHY

311

INDEX

333

7

C H A P T E R

I

INTRODUCTION

ENGLISH historical writing in the late eighteenth and early nineteenth centuries merits attention on two grounds. In the first place, if this period, especially the years between Gibbon's last volumes ( 1 7 8 8 ) and Hallam's Middle Ages ( 1 8 1 8 ) , was not fertile in great historians, it saw a successsion of works of respectable merit, and a distinct revival after 1800. Secondly, it marks the transition from the " rationalist" ideals of historical writing exemplified by Hume, Robertson and Gibbon to the very different ideals of the nineteenth century. In tracing this change, which it is the main purpose of the present essay to do, it is easier to set a terminal date than to find an exact beginning. By 1830 the basic elements in the nineteenth-century conception of history—romantic enthusiasm for the study of the past, nationalist zeal in portraying it, and the use of " scientific " methods in ascertaining the facts about it—had already found considerable expression among historians. Moreover, shortly after this date at least, the public records, fundamental sources of historical study in the last hundred years, were first adequately cared for and their importance properly realized. Meantime, also, the T o r y view of political history, which had received classic exposition from the pen of Hume, was being definitely superseded by a W h i g interpretation which became almost equally classic in the Victorian era. But when we turn to seek the beginning of the change which had gone so far by 1830, one great difficulty presents itself. Students of literary history have long recognized that 9

Jo

TRANSITION

IN ENGLISH

HISTORICAL

WRITING

" the more we investigate below the surface [of the eighteenth century], the clearer traces do we find of the Romantic movement, which is implicit in a constant series of writers from Dyer and Thomson to Chatterton and Blake." 1 In precisely the same way, if we look below the surface of the great period from 1 7 5 4 to 1788 when Hume, Robertson and Gibbon reigned so gloriously, we find vigorous dissent from their type of historical outlook. For this reason, therefore, the first five chapters of this essay, while mainly concerned with writers who flourished between 1780 and 1800, will give some attention to those of an earlier date.2 In the remaining chapters we shall deal chiefly with trends visible among historians of the first thirty years of the last century. The conception of history fashionable among the eighteenth-century rationalists is too familiar to need detailed description. But its main features should be summarized briefly for purposes of reference. History was believed to be the teacher of private virtue and correct public policy, and the justification for its study lay in this pragmatic value. For this purpose modern history, as being most nearly analogous to present conditions and most easily studied, was apt to be regarded as far more important than the history of earlier periods. Indeed, while classical history always enjoyed some of the respect it had won from the humanists, primitive ages, as ages of barbarism, and medieval civilization, as the product of ignorance and superstition, were held unworthy of the investigation of enlightened men or at best worth examining solely as the introduction to modern civilization. The historian was to write 1

T . Seccombe, The Age of Johnson London, 1928), p. xvi. 2

(1748-1798)

(3rd edition reprinted,

F o r the significance of the year 1780 in the periodization of literary history, see O. Elton, Survey of English Literature, 1780-1830 (London, 1920), vol. i, p. 9 et seq.

INTRODUCTION

II

in a " philosophical " spirit, by which was generally meant that he should attempt to penetrate beneath the surface of events to underlying causes and motives—to explain rather than merely to narrate. A l l history, moreover, was to be viewed critically and without any vulgar sentiment like national or religious partiality. More emphasis was placed on the presentation of results in a good literary style, and less on the arduous examination of first-hand sources, than in the nineteenth century, with the result that public records and manuscripts, now the delight of the historian and the object of governmental care, were then less assiduously cared for and consulted, although by no means utterly neglected. Generally speaking, too, because the eighteenth century was so satisfied with its own enlightenment it was not very successful in avoiding the mistake of judging past ages by modern standards foreign to them. 8 All these characteristics, however, are only one side of the rationalistic conception of history, and in most cases were shared by or inherited from previous schools. T h e ancients had insisted on the pragmatic value of history and on history as an art, while the medieval writers were quite as arbitrary in the application of their own ideals as any age could be. More novel, though not wholly original, was the attempt made in the eighteenth century to realize a type of history resembling in certain respects the " New History " about which there was so much controversy in American 3

der

On rationalistic historiography see especially E . Fueter, Geschichte neueren Historiographie (Munchen, 1 9 1 1 ) , bk. iv, pp. 334-414;

H . E . Barnes, " H i s t o r y , its rise and d e v e l o p m e n t "

in

Encyclopaedia

Americana ( N e w Y o r k , ed. t 1922) ; and J. B. Black, The Art of History ( N e w Y o r k , 1926). In this introductory chapter I have d r a w n f r e e l y f r o m P r o f e s s o r Black's excellent discussions of Hume, Robertson and Gibbon. But he would doubtless disagree with some of the opinions expressed.

12

TRANSITION

IN ENGLISH

HISTORICAL

WRITING

academic circles some years ago. The attempt failed, but its effects were never lost completely; it would doubtless be possible to trace a direct line of succession throughout the last century. It was in part a phase of the effort to build up a science of man, which has been called the " chief glory of the eighteenth century ",* while on other sides it developed out of the interests of preceding historians. Back of the movement then as now lay a belief that too much attention was being paid to wars and intrigues, to the doings of princes and diplomats, and too little to arts, sciences, economic and social life; and in some there appeared the same desire as now to explain how things actually came about rather than merely to gather a great many facts about the past. W e may distinguish several varieties of this new type of history. The first, " social history " it would be called today, sought merely to give information on customs and usages, dress, amusements, and the like, frequently in subordination to a narrative of political events in the old manner and usually without any principle of arrangement except chronological sequence. There was also, in the second place, a certain amount of study of the history of institutions and associations, whether within the boundaries of one country or over a larger area. Closely associated with these tendencies was the widespread interest in the natural history of society, in the general stages of social development rather than the history of events or particular institutions in any specific country or area. Seeking to treat of the general rather than the particular, it proceeded as far as possible by the comparative study of the history of different peoples. Where direct evidence failed it took the form of " conjectural " or " theoretical " history * J. H. Randall, The Making of the Modern Mind (New York, 1926), P. 308.

INTRODUCTION

13

which cannot be better described than in the words of Dugald Stewart:8 When, in such a period of society as that in which we live, we compare our intellectual acquirements, our opinions, manners, and institutions, with those which prevail among rude tribes, it cannot fail to occur to us as an interesting question, by what gradual steps the transition has been made from the first simple efforts of uncultivated nature, to a state of things so wonderfully artificial and complicated. Whence has arisen that systematical beauty which we admire in the structure of a cultivated language; that analogy which runs through the mixture of languages spoken by the most remote and unconnected nations; and those peculiarities by which they are all distinguished from each other? Whence the origin of the different sciences and of the different arts; and by what chain has the mind been led from their first rudiments to their last and most refined improvements? Whence the astonishing fabric of the political union; the fundamental principles which are common to all governments; and the different forms which civilized society has assumed in different ages of the world? On most of these subjects very little information is to be expected from history; for long before that stage of society when men begin to think of recording their transactions, many of the most important steps of their progress have been made. A few insulated facts may perhaps be collected from the casual observations of travellers, who have viewed the arrangements of rude nations; but nothing, it is evident, can be obtained in this way, which approaches to a regular and connected detail of human improvement. 8 D. Stewart, " The L i f e and Writings of Adam Smith, LL.D.", Works of Adam Smith (London, 1 8 1 1 ) , vol. v, pp. 448-450. A somewhat similar idea was expressed by Thomas Pownall in his Treatise on the Study of Antiquities (London, 1782), p. x : " By a careful analysis of human nature, and by a combination from analogy of such broken accounts as the ship-wreck of History affords, a description, almost historic, of the progress and first stages of human life may be composed; such as shall give a just representation of the general course of events."

I4

TRANSITION

IN ENGLISH

HISTORICAL

WRITING

In this want of direct evidence, we are under a necessity of supplying the place of fact by conjecture; and when we are unable to ascertain how men have actually conducted themselves upon particular occasions, of considering in what manner they are likely to have proceeded, from the principles of their nature, and the circumstances of their external situation. In such inquiries, the detached facts which travels and voyages afford us, may frequently serve as landmarks to our speculations; and sometimes our conclusions a priori may tend to confirm the credibility of facts, which, on a superficial view, appeared to be doubtful or incredible. Nor are such theoretical views of human affairs subservient merely to the gratification of curiosity. In examining the phenomena of the material world, when we cannot trace the process by which an event has been produced, it is often ot importance to be able to show how it may have been produced by natural causes. T h u s in the instance which has suggested these remarks, although it is impossible to determine with certainty what the steps were by which any particular language was formed, yet if we can shew, from the known principles of human nature, how all its various parts might gradually have arisen, the mind is not only to a certain degree satisfied, but a check is given to that indolent philosophy, which refers to a miracle, whatever appearances, both in the natural and moral worlds, it is unable to explain. T o this species of philosophical investigation, which has no appropriate name in our language, I shall take the liberty ot giving the title of Theoretical or Conjectural History; an expression which coincides pretty nearly in its meaning with that of Natural History, as employed by Mr. Hume, and with what some French writers have called Histoire Raisonnee. In H u m e ' s Religion "

8

essays

such as " T h e

Natural

and " O f the Original Contract "

7

History

of

we have an

4 David Hume, Essays, Moral, Political and Literary (ed. T . H. Green and T . H. Grose, 2 vols., London, 1875), vol. ii, pp. 309-363. On Hume as an historian see also infra, pp. 19-23; 69-72. 7 Ibid., vol. i, pp. 443-46o.

INTRODUCTION

15

early use of the conjectural method. Hume had read a good deal of history and was accustomed to combine speculation with references to historical facts. These references, however, are more frequently to ancient than to modern writers. They also tended to be quite generalized—conjecture was a more important element than history in his thinking. Still he used the historical approach when he studied religion or the state by reference to its origins. Perhaps the outstanding example of the conjectural method was A d a m Ferguson's Essay on the History of Civil Society ( 1 7 6 7 ) . Few books have been more variously estimated. By some sociologists Ferguson is hailed as a father of their subject, 8 while Dunning is warm in praise of his services to political science.® T h e latter declared that " the critical spirit of Hume and the historical spirit of Montesquieu were most attractively combined in Ferguson." 10 Against this may be set the judgment of Sir Leslie Stephen, who finds that " Ferguson was in politics what Blair was in theology—a facile and dexterous declaimer, whose rhetoric glides over the surface of things without biting into their substance," 11 and the contemptuous epithet of Laski who calls him a " pinchbeck Montesquieu." 1 2 T h e Essay deals with six main topics: the general characteristics of human nature; the history of " rude nations " ; See W . C. Lehmann, Adam Ferguson and the Beginnings of Modern Sociology ( N e w York, 1930), for a very favorable estimate of Ferguson and for references to the opinions of other sociologists. On Ferguson see also infra, pp. 45-50. 8

9 W . A . Dunning, A History of Political Spencer ( N e w York, 1922), pp. 65-71.

Theories

from Rousseau

to

" Ibid., p. 65. 1 1 Sir Leslie Stephen, History of English Thought in the Eighteenth Century (3rd edition, reprinted, London, 1927), vol. ii, p. 215. 1 2 H. J. Laski, Political Thought in England from Locke ( N e w York, 1920), p. 174.

to Bentham

16

TRANSITION

IN ENGLISH

HISTORICAL

WRITING

the history of " policy and arts " ; the consequences that result from the advancement of civil and commercial arts; the decline of nations; and corruption and political slavery. Each of these constitutes the subject of one of the six parts into which the book is divided. But the range is even wider than the list given might suggest. There are short chapters on the intellectual powers, the moral sentiments, happiness, national felicity, the influence of climate and geographic environment, the history of arts, literature, luxury, and so forth. About thirty such topics are discussed in the thirty-six sections into which the Essay is divided, a fact which helps to explain the impression of scrappiness one receives from reading it. Some of the views expressed are arresting in their accuracy, or at least their modernity, as explanations of social change. This is true of the emphasis upon conflict in society,18 and especially of the remarks upon the power of instinct, accident and social need, as opposed to speculation or deliberate planning, in creating human institutions. One passage is especially worth quoting: 14 Like the winds that come we know not whence, and blow whithersoever they list, the forms of society are derived from an obscure and distant origin; they arise, long before the date of philosophy, from the instinct, not from the speculations of men. . . . Nations stumble upon establishments; which are indeed the result of human action, but not the execution of any human design. . . . No constitution is formed by concert; no government is copied from a plan. It is equally striking to find that Ferguson agrees with modern conclusions in attributing inventions to a mixture of accident and social desire,18 and that he sees clearly some of 13

An Essay on the History of Civil Society (7th edition, Boston, 1809),

PP- 33-41. 14

Ibid., pp. 198-199.

18

Ibid., p. 277.

" Inventions, we frequently observe, are accidental;

INTRODUCTION

17

the difficulties involved in a favorite practice of the century, that of drawing an analogy between the history of an individual and a nation.1* The significance of the Essay and of the conjectural method which it exemplifies arises from the value of such observations in explaining the processes of history. Ferguson sought to combine the evidence derived from descriptions of extant primitive peoples with that obtained from more conventional sources to throw light on the origin and early development of human society.17 He himself was mainly interested in " rude ages " because he believed that there human nature in its original form was to be found—perhaps also because he shared in part the growing idealization of primitive man. He did not write a history of society or a full description of early society, merely giving observations on certain phenomena that struck his attention. He sought to explain rather than to describe. Next in importance to Ferguson among the conjectural historians was John Millar, a pupil of Adam Smith, an acquaintance of Hume, and long a professor of law at the University of Glasgow. 18 His Origin of the Distinction of Ranks ( 1 7 7 1 ) was intended to be a study in the natural history of but it is probable, that an accident which escapes the artist in one age, may be seized by one w h o succeeds him, and w h o is better apprized of its use. W h e r e circumstances are favourable, and where a people is intent on the object of any art, every invention is preserved, by being brought into general practice; every model is studied, and every accident is turned to account. If nations actually borrow f r o m their neighbours, they probably borrow only what they are nearly in a condition to have invented themselves." 18

Ibid., pp. 344-345-

17

Ibid., pp. 121-131.

18

There is an " Account of the L i f e and W r i t i n g s of John Millar, Esq.", by John Craig, prefixed to the fourth edition of the Origin of the Distinction of Ranks (Edinburgh and London, 1806), pp. i - c x x x i v . S e e also infra, pp. 82-84.

l8

TRANSITION

IN ENGLISH

HISTORICAL

WRITING

society. 1 9 Impressed by the new evidence afforded the philosopher by the geographical discoveries, he wished to employ this evidence f o r speculative purposes." His most original features were the long discussions of the status of women in ages of barbarism, in pastoral and agricultural societies, and finally after the development of industry, the arts, and opulence. 21 A t less length he considered the effect of social and economic evolution on the authority of a father over his children, of a chief over tribe and village, of a sovereign over a society composed of different tribes or villages, and of a master over his servants. H e spent some time, also, on such topics as the circumstances tending to increase the political privileges of the people, and the political consequences of slavery. It is evident that the work of such writers as the above, while called history, was very different f r o m what history has generally been understood to be. It may, however, lay down a genuine principle of investigation. The most rigorous historians admit that a knowledge of the present helps to explain the past; and they apply their knowledge of matters like psychology to estimating the worth of historical evidence. It is possible that the assured findings of other branches of knowledge may supplement historical evidence in that reconstruction of the past which is the ultimate aim of history. It is equally evident, however, that history is only one of the studies seeking this goal. History receives its distinctive character because it specializes in the establishment from direct evidence, generally documents, of a narrative of particular events, a description of particular institutions, or an analysis of a specific age or civilization. It seeks to indulge «Ibid., p. 108. 20 From the preface to the first edition, p. iii. 21 J . F. MacLennan, Studies in Ancicnt History (1871), p. 420, note. Cited by Sir Leslie Stephen, art. " John Millar " in D. .V. B.

INTRODUCTION

19

in as little speculation as possible about what may have happened, preferring to become silent when there is no concrete evidence available. In direct opposition to the conjectural method it pays special attention to the order of events in time and is not at all concerned about building up a series of stages through which society or any of its institutions may be presumed to have passed. The writers who used the comparative-conjectural method frequently knew a good deal of history and perhaps aided in the study of the past. But while they followed a method of inquiry closely related to that favored by the historian they cannot be regarded as historians in the stricter sense of the term.22 Their works would not, therefore, concern us at length even if these had been more numerous and longer continued than was actually the case. In fact, however, there were fewer examples of conjectural histories after 1780 than before and those few of no great importance. The most famous monuments of rationalistic historiography were, of course, the works of Hume, Robertson and Gibbon. Hume's History of England (1754-62) may be treated first not only as being the earliest of the series of works by these authors, but also because Hume's preeminence among the philosophers of the eighteenth century gives a peculiar interest to his manner of writing history. Moreover Hume was for a hundred years probably the most widely read and most influential of English historians. 23 More re2 2 On the comparative-conjectural method, both in the eighteenth century and later, see F . J. T e g g a r t , Theory of History ( N e w Haven, 1925), especially P a r t II. F o r a discussion f r o m a sociological standpoint see Lehmann, op. cit., chaps. 14 and 15. 2 3 A s late as 1824 John Allen called Hume " the most popular of our historians" (Edinburgh Review, vol. xi, March, 1824, p. 94). I n 1828 Macaulay called him " t h e ablest and most p o p u l a r " of modern historians (Edinburgh Review, M a y , 1828, p. 359. Quot. John Laird, Hume's Philosophy of Human Nature, London, 1932, p. 262). A hostile w r i t e r

2Q

TRANSITION

IN ENGLISH

HISTORICAL

WRITING

cently he has been credited with being the first to come within measurable distance of writing a " national history," that is, a general account beginning with Caesar's invasion, incorporating not only politics, but something of economic, social and intellectual life as well.24 It is maintained that he not only had genius of style, but attempted in his volumes on the Stuarts to handle the seventeenth-century struggles in an impartial spirit and with due regard to the historical setting in which the respective claims of King and Parliament were put forward. He saw that much might seem legal and constitutional to a Stuart monarch that would be correctly regarded as an attack on public liberty in the next century, and he emphasized the fact that the Constitution was not clearly outlined until after 1688. By so doing he brought a breath of realism into the atmosphere of rabid partisanship surrounding previous discussions of the seventeenth century. 25 Even though his views of the English Constitution have long in the Quarterly Review for March, 1844 (p. 5 4 1 ) said (what is not, however, fully true) that all historians of any reputation subsequent to Hume had been his disciples; while much later he was the " boyhood's manual" of Mr. Winston Churchill. I owe the last two references to P r o f . Laird also. (Ibid., p. 261.) W e shall see, however, that Hume was strongly criticized from an early date. He was sometimes, perhaps generally, rated above both Robertson and Gibbon. Francis Maseres said of Adam Smith ( " A n Account of the Opinions of the late Adam Smith, L L . D . " in Occasional Essays on Various Subjects, London, 1809, p. 179) : " I was surprised at hearing him prefer Livy to all other historians, ancient and modern. No other had even pretence to rival him, if David Hume could not claim that honor." Nieubuhr said: " I willingly recognize Hume's great qualities, and his decided superiority to Gibbon." Letter to Princess Louisa, 1814, Life and Letters of Barthold George Niebuhr, ed. and trans, by Susanna Winksworth, 2nd ed. (London, 1852), vol. i, p. 423. Robert Bisset speaks more favorably of Hume than of Robertson or Gibbon. History of the Reign of George III (London, 1803), vol. ii, pp. 469-470. 2

* O. Elton, Survey vol. ii, p. 277.

of English

On this see infra, pp. 69-72.

Literature,

1730-1780

(London, 1928),

INTRODUCTION

21

since been superseded, the publication of his History marked an epoch. In other respects Hume's History was less an innovation in historiography than is sometimes believed. Its author had no special vision of the need for a national history of England, but turned to historical writing when disappointed with his reception as a philosopher and after he had secured ready access to authorities through appointment as the Librarian of the Faculty of Advocates at Edinburgh. His main interest and his greatest success were in writing on the Stuart period, a subject long popular among British historians. He then went back to the Tudors, partly at least to answer critics of his views of the seventeenth century, and afterwards produced two further volumes on the Middle Ages at the instigation of his publisher and " chiefly as a resource against idleness." 26 Thus in the end he had written a six-volume history of England, but it was not a deliberate or a very successful attempt at a synthesis of the national history. For such a task Hume's outlook was too circumscribed. In spite of his attempt at impartiality he allowed his antiW h i g bias to color his writing more and more, so that while Macaulay was too severe in calling him a mere advocate, and he was better than his predecessors in respect to political partisanship, he did not rise to the standards he set himself for his volumes on modern times. 27 The Anglo-Saxon and medieval periods he treated with studied contempt. He did recognize that the Middle A g e s had made some contributions to civilization and distinguished between the early and later Middle A g e s ; but he made no great effort to understand 2 6 J. B. Black, op. cii.y p. 84. J. H . Burton, Life of David Hume (Edinburgh, 1846), vol. ii, p. 61. 2 7 F o r alterations in a T o r y op. cit., vol. ii, pp. 73-78.

and

Correspondence

direction made by H u m e see

Burton,

22

TRANSITION

IN ENGLISH

HISTORICAL

WRITING

medieval culture and he failed to comprehend its real place in English history. Not only were whole areas of history outside his ken, but many aspects even of modern history he merely skimmed over. He inserted occasional chapters on non-political matters, but was mainly concerned with the old-fashioned political chronicle. As Professor Black has said: 2 8 Voltaire's chapters on moeurs are among his most brilliant; Hume's register his most signal failure. To the modern mind, they exhibit no vestige of order or connexion; on the contrary, they are merely chaotic catalogues of casually-selected facts dealing with social and economic phenomena, literature, or uncommon occurrences, which have struck the author in the course of his reading; rag-bags, as it were, specifically invented to receive whatever odds and ends cannot be utilized in the main body of the history . . . a reflection on the extreme narrowness of his outlook as a historian. More serious yet was Hume's lack of any synthesizing principle. He had no strong belief in a natural development, progressive or otherwise, inherent in the historic process, nor did he believe in a providential guidance that might bind past and present together. He thought rather that human nature is always much the same and from this drew the conclusion that history is equally unvaried. It was for him a " repeating decimal," 29 each period to be explained in terms of individuals, always animated by the same intellectualistic motives. The deep-lying emotions of men, religious impulses, mass movements, economic conditions, geographic environment— the most important elements in history, those that condition, perhaps even determine, human actions—to all these he failed to give full weight. Added to this was the fact that his research was notoriously p. ns.

28

Op. cit.,

29

Ibid., p. 98-

INTRODUCTION

23

and admittedly superficial. Not for him the laborious consultation of manuscripts and ponderous folios. He preferred to work from easily accessible chroniclers or from Carte and other compilers. He knew little European history, and even in English history was at home only in the seventeenth century. H e was far inferior in learning to Robertson and Gibbon. In spite of his superiority in genius and his great influence on the century, he did far less than might reasonably be expected from such a man to advance history beyond the status of a literary exercise or a chronicle of the surface events of politics. He did not realize the larger aims of the rationalistic historiography. Robertson was more significant. In the first place, he contributed to historical composition a new and fruitful device by which style might be saved without harm to scholarship. W r i t i n g for the general public, his scientific instincts gave him an interest in topics of investigation too difficult or too remote for such readers. He, therefore, presented the body of his histories in a straightforward narrative without too much encumbrance of academic digression, technical discussion or quotations from documents, and added a concluding section of " proofs and illustrations " devoted to such matters. Sometimes these were merely notes or references that might easily be placed at the bottom of the pages of his narrative, but often they comprised pioneer efforts to solve some of the thorny problems of historical research. 30 In the second place, Robertson was outstanding in his day as a scholar. A man of enormous industry, possessed of " a strong leathery physique and an infinite capacity for sedentary toil," 31 his first work, The History of Scotland dur30 On Robertson's "excellent and novel method" (O. Elton, Survey, 1730-1780, London, 1928, vol. ii, p. 278) see Dugald Stewart in the Works of William Robertson (8 vols., London, 1840), vol. i, pp. lx-lxiii. 31

T . Seccombe, op. cit., p. 133.

24

TRANSITION

IN ENGLISH

HISTORICAL

WRITING

ing the Reigns of Queen Mary and King James VI ( 1 7 5 9 ) , marked a distinct advance in its field. Robertson took full advantage of great stores of new material which had been printed but not incorporated into an historical narrative, and went beyond these to secure data in the Library of the Faculty of Advocates at Edinburgh, in the British Museum (to which he secured access before it was opened to the public), in private collections, and through correspondence with other students. 32 " Nothing like so massive a ' domesday ' of material had ever been compassed by any previous historian " 33 as was contained in the History of Scotland on its first appearance; nor did Robertson cease to improve his text in later editions as he was given access to additional sources.*4 It is indeed not possible to speak with equal respect of the scholarship in his Charles V ( 1 7 6 9 ) . The subject was more strange to Robertson, the rich archives at Simancas were not yet fully investigated and he did not take the trouble to learn German, although he knew French, Spanish and Italian. N o r does he indulge to the same extent, except in the introductory volume summarizing the development of Europe during the Middle Ages, in those supplementary notes into which he had put so much learning in his earlier book. T h e Charles V remains, in spite of its enormous reputation in the eighteenth century and in spite of the fact that some critics have rated it the best of Robertson's works, a polished but not very penetrating account of a great subject. The introductory volume on the Middle Ages is indeed in many ways Robertson's greatest effort, but not from the 32

History

33

Black, op. cit., pp. 119-120.

of Scotland,

P r e f a c e , Works,

vol. i, pp. c x x v i i - c x x x .

3 4 " W h e r e v e r the opportunity of consulting original papers either in print or in manuscript, to which I had not formerly access, has enabled me to throw new light upon any part of the history, I have made alterations and additions which, I flatter myself, will be found to be of some importance." P r e f a c e to n t h edition, Works, vol. i, p. c x x x i .

INTRODUCTION

25

standpoint of research, wherein S. R . Maitland has convicted him of error and carelessness. 35 The History of America ( 1 7 7 7 ) , however, was another work of high scholarly merit. T h e author was more happy with this subject than when dealing with the Spanish Empire in Europe. His style is uplifted by the enthralling nature of the adventures he has to recount, the careers of men like Columbus and Cortes; the list of authorities he consulted is impressive, and the texture of the narrative solid." Robertson's last work, the Historical Disquisition Concerning Ancient India ( 1 7 9 1 ) is not one upon which his reputation rests, and it was completed in the course of twelve months, 87 but it too showed wide and careful use of authorities consulted, though the subject was too broad and the study too brief for a treatment of long-standing merit. Robertson, we may conclude, had far greater scholarly instincts than Hume or than the majority of historians in his day. He was a zealous student o f printed materials and went beyond to unprinted sources. In certain other respects Robertson fell short of the high35

S. R. Maitland, The Dark Ages; A series of Essays (2nd ed., London, 1845), Essays 2-7 (pp. 9-122) and Essay 9 (pp. 141-151). 36

Yet in working over some of the same ground himself, Robert Southey came to have a low opinion of the History of America upon which he passed judgment in no uncertain terms: " . . . Dr. R o b e r t s o n . . . in what he calls his History of America, is guilty of such omissions, and consequent misrepresentations, as to make it certain, either that he had not read some of the most important documents to which he refers, or that he did not choose to notice the facts which are to be found there, because they were not in conformity to his own preconceived opinions The reputation of this author must rest upon his History of S c o t l a n d , . . . if that can support it. His other works are grievously deficient." History of Brazil (London, 1810-1819), vol. i, p. 639. Quot. Bernhard Pier, William Robertson als Historiker uitd Geschichtsphilosoph (Radbold, n . d . ) , pp. 38-39. 87

D. Stewart in Works, vol. i, p. Ivii.

26

TRANSITION

IN ENGLISH

HISTORICAL

WRITING

est standards of rationalistic historiography. The History of Scotland is mainly a narrative of political events without much attempt to get at underlying factors, while in spite of the promise of its introductory survey the Charles V contains practically no account of institutions or of social and economic life. 38 Instead there are endless wars and negotiations, those ghastly Italian wars over which so many students have groaned, relieved occasionally by passages such as the interesting discussion of the rise of the principle of toleration and the account of the Jesuit order. Thucydides could write of the Peloponnesian W a r and make it the theme for observations of eternal value to philosophers and politicians; while Tacitus could make a drama out of the court history of the early Roman Empire. But Robertson was neither a deep thinker nor a great artist, and the Empire of Charles V proved too much for him. He had no key with which to unlock the secret of its events. He was deeply interested in the story of discoveries, and conscious of the importance of commerce, as we can see from his View and from the Historical Disquisition, but he came too early to grasp the full importance for Europe itself of what we call the Commercial Revolution. At the same time, in spite of his cloth, he was too much under the influence of Rationalism to appreciate fully the greatest religious revolution. " He will tell us nothing of the ethos of Protestantism, or of its significance in the development of the individual, society, or the state. His picture, in short, is mechanical, external, and without substance." 39 Yet it is well to remember that all such criticism is relative. 3 8 " W e r als Deutscher Robertsons Geschichte Karl V liest, wird über das dürftige Bild der Reichsverfassung und der inneren Verhältnisse in Deutschland einigermassen erstaunt sein." B. Pier, op. cit., pp. 40-4I39

Black, op. cit., p. 140.

27

INTRODUCTION

F o r example, P r o f e s s o r Black censures R o b e r t s o n f o r devoting too much attention to political and military detail and then w o n d e r i n g w h y the changes o f the era of Charles seemed so disproportionate to the causes.

V

S u c h a conclusion,

he says, " is certainly quite fallacious if applied to that other aspect o f the subject, the religious revolution.

I f this had

been g i v e n the prominence due to it, and the other transactions o f the period carefully subordinated to it, there need have been no anti-climax to the book, and in all likelihood Robertson would have written a more attractive and convincing h i s t o r y . "

40

N o w in some schools o f history in recent

years, Robertson or P r o f e s s o r

Black w o u l d be criticized

almost as much f o r subordinating the history o f the early sixteenth century to the religious revolution as to political and military events, while prominence w o u l d be given rather to economic changes and geographic expansion.

Another

generation may well s w i n g back to emphasis on politics, though surely not to that satisfaction w i t h the mere detail of political

episodes which

is the real weakness

for

which

Robertson is open to criticism. N o t w i t h s t a n d i n g such criticism o f some o f

Robertson's

w o r k due credit must be given to him f o r the w a y in w h i c h he sought to t r a n s f o r m historical writing.

H e laid great

w e i g h t on the necessity of p a y i n g more attention to economic and intellectual affairs, f o r it is a cruel mortification, searching for what is instructive in the history of the past times, to find that the exploits of conquerors who have desolated the earth, and the freaks of tyrants who have rendered nations unhappy, are recorded with minute and often disgusting accuracy, while the discovery of useful arts, and the progress of the most beneficial branches of commerce, are passed over in silence, and suffered to sink into oblivion. 41 40

Ibid., p. 139.

11

Works,

vol. viii, p. 177.

28

TRANSITION

IN ENGLISH

HISTORICAL

WRITING

Like so many of his contemporaries also, he was deeply impressed by the real or supposed resemblance between the circumstances of the ancient Germans and the American Indians, 42 and adhered to the idea that peoples in similar situations are apt to be pretty much alike whatever their racial connections may be. Hence, too, he accepted the notion of the profit to be derived from the study of comparative history, suggesting that many obscure points of the English constitution might thus be cleared u p . " Robertson's interest in the larger movements of history resulted in his View of the State of Society in the Middle Ages, prefixed to the Charles V. This slim volume was an interpretative essay rather than a chronicle of events and in it the author sought to analyze the factors in the progressive development of European civilization from the Fall of the Roman Empire to the opening of the sixteenth century. As already mentioned, S. R. Maitland made a rather severe criticism of certain ideas about the Middle Ages propounded in this essay, while more recently Robertson has been held largely responsible for the continuance of the notorious myth of the year iooo (the notion that the end of the world was looked for generally throughout Europe then) and for the overemphasis on the influence of the Crusades, two of the most persistent sources of error in the understanding of medieval history. 44 But with all its faults the View remains a remarkable attempt to elucidate the main forces at work during a thousand years of European history, reaching its high point in the enumeration of the causes of the revival of European civilization from the " Dark Ages " succeeding the Roman Empire. Robertson throws the emphasis upon such 42

Works,

vol. iii, pp. 189-194.

43

Works,

vol. iii, p. 333.

44

H . E . Barnes, History, its Rise and Development, p. 230 (Reprinted f r o m the Encyclopaedia Americana, New Y o r k , ed., 1 9 2 2 ) .

INTRODUCTION

29

great events as the Crusades, the rise of towns, the influence of the canon law, the revival of commerce, etc., never once allowing himself to forget his main purpose or slip down into mere episode. I t has been said with some degree of reason that in this dissertation and in the first Book of the History of Scotland where a similar task is undertaken, Robertson showed a wider and " more synthetic " conception of history than Gibbon or Hume. 4 5 H e was not merely narrating a series of events, but without lapsing into conjecture he was seeking that inner connection of events and the great movements that are the theme of history in its more serious aspects. In so doing he was setting his contemporaries a new standard of historical study. Gibbon also sought to rear a British monument of philosophical history, hoping to be associated in the public mind with Hume and Robertson. H e was distinctly rationalistic in the cosmopolitanism of his outlook. H e weighed the civilizations of the past by the standards of his own day as the rationalists were prone to do, and he shared their general lack of appreciation f o r revealed religion. H e was perhaps a little unconventional in devoting so much attention to the history of the Middle A g e s , but his primary interest was, of course, in Rome. He did not realize that his subject would carry him as f a r down the centuries as the event proved, and his treatment became less satisfactory both in extent and quality as he moved into the Christian era. J . B. B u r y has pointed out 4 * that the Decline and Fall may be divided into two parts, a very full account of the period A . D. 1 8 0 - 6 4 1 , and a summary account, omitting many important details, of 45

Encyclopaedia

46

Britannica,

n t h edition, art. " W i l l i a m Robertson."

In his article on Gibbon in the Encyclopaedia Britannica, n t h edition, and in his Introduction to The History of the Declinc and Fall of the Roman Empire (ed. J . B. Bury, London, 1900-1902, 7 vols.), vol. i, pp. liii-liv.

30

TRANSITION

IN ENGLISH

HISTORICAL

WRITING

the long stretch of time f r o m 641 to 1453 A . D .

H e r e he

laid the stress, as one would expect f r o m the title, on the notion of civilization in decline,

with relative neglect of the

fact that this period may well be viewed as one of advance, of the rise of Germanic K i n g d o m s , the Papacy and other institutions that constituted the foundations of modern Europe. 4 7 It is probably not true that " Gibbon's verdict on the history of the Middle A g e s is contained in the famous sentence, ' I have described the triumph of barbarism and religion,' "

48

and he certainly did not indulge in the blanket condemnations of H u m e ; but Gibbon none the less shared the rationalistic lack of sympathy with the medieval period. Y e t in so f a r as he is a rationalistic historian, Gibbon is, like H u m e , in a distinctively British tradition.

H e does not

have the grasp of great social forces possessed by Montesquieu and V o l t a i r e ; and while he inserts illuminating passages on economic and social matters, these f o r m a subordinate part of his history.

T o him " wars and the adminis-

tration of public affairs are the principal subjects of history."

48

But where H u m e departed f r o m the rationalistic

norm mainly because he was not yet emancipated f r o m older conventions of historical writing, especially the E n g l i s h concern with party history, Gibbon reached out to a new type of historiography which was to succeed that of the rationalists.

N o t h i n g could be more " romantic " than the scene

on the Capitoline Hill where he decided to write the and Fall; 47

Decline

and the emotion of that moment was never com-

Black, op. cit., pp. 164-165.

J. B . B u r y in E. B . art., " Gibbon. - ' Cf. Decline and Fall, Introd., pp. x x x v i i i - x x x i x , and J. B. Black, op. cit., pp. 166-173, where a number of passages are cited to make a convincing argument against B u r y ' s view that Gibbon held Christianity purely destructive in influence and mainly responsible f o r Rome's overthrow. 48

40

Decline

and Fall

( B u r y ed.), vol. i, p. 236.

INTRODUCTION

pletely

lost

in

the

long

31

pilgrimage

that

followed. 5 0

If

Gibbon's style is artificial, appealing " to the brain, rather than the h e a r t , "

51

and unable to portray passion or human

nature, critics have seen also his sense o f color and his love o f Oriental splendour. 5 2

H i s description of meeting for the

first time as a b o y a history o f the Byzantine Empire, shows h o w early he felt the charm of the O r i e n t : 5 3 T o me the reigns of the successors of Constantine were absolutely new; and I was immersed in the passage of the Goths over the Danube when the summons of the dinner bell reluctantly dragged me from my intellectual feast. This transient glance served rather to irritate than to appease my curiosity; . . . I procured the second and third volumes of Howel's History of the World, which exhibits the Byzantine period on a larger scale. Mahomet and his Saracens soon fixed my attention; and some instinct of criticism directed me to the genuine sources. Simon Ockley, an original in every sense, first opened my eyes; and I was led from one book to another till I had ranged round the circle of Oriental history. Before I was sixteen I had exhausted all that could be learned in English of the Arabs and Persians, the Tartars and the T u r k s ; and the same ardour urged me to guess at the French of d'Herbelot, and to construe the barbarous Latin of Pocock's Abulfaragius. Gibbon touches the imagination of his readers by the names and association he calls to their attention.

There is

absent f r o m his style both the crystal-clear intellectuality of H u m e and the chasteness o f expression of Robertson. " D a s G e f ü h l , welches Gibbon, als er unter den Ruinen des Capitols sitzend, Barfüssermönche im Tempel des Jupiter die Vesper singen hörte, zu dem Entschluss, seine grosse Composition zu unternehmen, begeisterte, tönt durch das ganze W e r k hindurch." J. W . Loebell, " Ucber die Epochen der Geschichtschreibung und ihr Verhältnis zur Poesie, Eine Skizze," Historische Taschenbuch ( L e i p z i g , 1841), p. 361. 5 1 Black, op. cit., p. 176 and footnote. 52

O. Elton, Survey

53

Autobiography

of English

Literature,

1730-1780, vol. ii, p. 295.

( E v e r y m a n ed., London, 1 9 1 1 ) , pp. 35-36.

32

TRANSITION

IN ENGLISH

HISTORICAL

WRITING

Gibbon w a s thus touched by the interest in Oriental things characteristic of Romanticism. H e also placed research higher in the scale of historical values than was customary among Rationalists. T h e y did not despise the laborious amassing of information provided it was then used towards pragmatic or philosophical ends. But with Gibbon the historian's task consisted mainly in adequate research followed by the artistic presentation of material. H e was first a student, a born historian, then an artist, then a philosopher. His own description of his method indicates how vigilant he was to follow the lines suggested by his r e a d i n g : 5 4 We must be careful not to make the order of our thoughts subservient to that of our subjects; this would be to sacrifice the principal to the accessory. The use of our reading is to aid us in thinking. The perusal of a particular work gives birth, perhaps, to ideas unconnected with the subject of which it treats. I wish to pursue these ideas; they withdraw me from my proposed plan of reading, and throw me into a new track, and from thence, perhaps, into a second and a third; at length I begin to perceive whither my researches tend. . . . Another indication of greater interest in the acquisition and ordering of information than in philosophical reasoning therefrom is the fact that there are comparatively few generalizations in Gibbon—even f e w occasions when he stops in his course and surveys the road over which he has travelled. This, indeed, helps to explain his hold on immortality. 5 5 The social sciences change too rapidly f o r the philosophical survey of history in one age to be of much validity in the next. Gibbon's work has lived as a great mine of material arranged with artistic genius, illuminated with penetrating observa54

p. 2. 55

Miscellaneous Works (3 vols., ed. Lord Sheffield, 1 8 1 5 ) , vol. ii, Quot., Black, op. cit., p. 149. J . Cotter Morison, Gibbon (2nd ed., London, 1878), p. 115.

INTRODUCTION

33

tions, yet not forced under the yoke o f a philosophical system. However, this point, while true in the main, must not be given too much weight. The very title o f Gibbon's book, covering as it did European history to the middle fifteenth century, implied a generalization o f the most far-reaching character. Finally, it should be noted that while Gibbon has the biasses of rationalism, and his book could never have been written except in the eighteenth century, he is, when compared with most o f his contemporaries, remarkably impartial. Even in considering Christianity few distortions are found outside the first volume. 56 Sometimes he was betrayed by unsound authorities like Procopius into serious lapses in judgment—the estimate o f the Byzantine Empire being the most notorious—but on the whole, blunders arise only where the sources at his disposal were themselves incorrect. He followed the evidence with scrupulous and critical care unexcelled or even equaled at that time. Such qualities in his work foreshadowed a new type o f historian and have kept his memory green among subsequent scholars. 56

Ibid., pp. 121-128.

C H A P T E R RATIONALIST HISTORY,

II 1780-1800

AMONG those who carried on the tradition of rationalist history in the latter part of the century a high place belongs to Robert Henry, author of History of Great Britain on a New Plan ( 1 7 7 1 - 1 7 9 3 ) 1 Where Hume had been mainly concerned with political and constitutional history and only secondarily with society and manners, Henry's idea was to make his work equally complete on the economic, social, political, and intellectual sides. He began with an interesting criticism of his predecessors for their narrowness of outlook: 2 The far greater number of our historians have given us only a detail of our civil, military, and ecclesiastical affairs: a few of them have inserted occasional dissertations on our constitution, government, and laws: but not one of them hath given, or so much as pretended or designed to give, any thing like a history of learning, arts, commerce, and manners. All that we find in the very best of our historians, on these interesting subjects, are a few cursory remarks, which serve rather to excite than gratify our curiosity. Are these subjects then unworthy of a place in history; especially in the history of a country where learning, arts, commerce, and politeness flourish; doth not the ingenious scholar, who hath enlarged and enlightened the faculties of the human mind; the inventive artist, who hath encreased the comforts and conveniences of human life; the adventurous merchant or mariner, who hath discovered unknown countries, and opened 1

V o l u m e V I , of the first quarto edition, w a s completed by Malcolm L a i n g and published posthumously. R e f e r e n c e s here are to 4th edition (London, 1 8 0 5 - 1 8 0 6 ) . 2

Op. cit., vol. i, p. xiii.

34

RATIONALIST

HISTORY

35

new sources of trade and wealth; deserve a place in the annals of his country, and in the grateful remembrance of posterity; as well as even the good prince, the wise politician, or the victorious general ? Lest he himself make the same omissions, Henry proposed to divide British history into ten periods, each beginning and ending with some " remarkable revolution." Each period was to be the subject of a book, and each book was divided into seven chapters under the following heads: civil and military history; ecclesiastical history; constitutional history; government, laws, and courts of justice; learning, learned men, and seminaries of learning; the arts; commerce, shipping, money and prices; manners, customs, vices, dress, diet, and amusements. Maps were given in appendices and the sources of information in footnotes. This plan had already been used, in F r a n c e ; a nor was Henry the first to suggest, though he was the first to realize, a history of Britain along such lines.4 It is hardly necessary to point out that the scheme was too mechanical, making for the compilation of facts, but not the composition of history, for comprehensiveness rather than comprehension. But it is just the sort of arrangement that might be expected to appeal to one like Henry who had no sense of the continuity of history or of the organic unity of the different parts of society in any given era. He failed to realize the interaction of economic, social, political, and intellectual movements—or rather events since Henry did not rise to the conception of movements. T h u s each book, each chapter almost, is a separate entity, and chronology the only link between them. Nor, In 1761, there w a s published at Edinburgh The Origin of Laws, Arts, and Sciences, and their Progress among the most ancient Nations. Translated from the French of the President dc Goguet, 3 volumes octavo. T h e organization is almost exactly that of H e n r y . 3

4

It was suggested by Priestley, on whom see below pp. 57-62.

36

TRANSITION

IN ENGLISH

HISTORICAL

WRITING

in spite of his professions, did Henry avoid giving more attention to political and military episodes than to other matters. Moreover his style, in spite of the quotation given above, was frequently dull and mechanical like his organization. To this catalogue of defects must be added Henry's lack of a critical sense. He asserts blandly that the pagan religions were descended from the sons of Noah, from whom had come the Druids, " gymnosophists " and Brahmins of India, the Magi of Persia, the Chaldeans of Assyria, and the priests of Egypt. The Celtic nations, languages and religion, whose origin was a sore subject of controversy in his day, he traced to " Gomer, the eldest son of Japhet." 5 Along with credulity went a naivete revealing itself in such sentences as that on the nakedness of early m a n : " However surprising and incredible it may appear to us, there is hardly any one fact in ancient history better attested than this:— That the first inhabitants of every country in Europe, and particularly of this island, were either naked or almost naked." 8 With this went a sense of humor so tawdry that he could refer to the Pope as " the old gentleman at Rome " and make infantile jokes about Dunstan. 7 Although abounding in depreciation of the religion and civilization of the Middle Ages, Henry thought their history important enough to warrant several large volumes, a striking contrast to the cavalier fashion in which Hume treated the same period. 8 Like so many of his day, too, 5

Op. cit., vol. i, pp. 136, 149-150.

6

Ibid., vol. ii, p. 341.

7

Ibid., vol. vii, p. 320.

8

Henry's use of second-hand sources and inaccuracy in dealing with the Middle Ages were pointed out by Lingard ( A n t i q u i t i e s of the AngloSaxon Church, 3d American edition, Baltimore, 1854, pp. 100-101, 125 et passim) and by S. R . Maitland, op. cit., pp. 122-141.

RATIONALIST

HISTORY

37

he was touched by the revival of medieval poetry, was an admirer of chivalry, and an enthusiastic believer in Ossian. 8 T o these signs of contact with the romanticist movement, we may add his interest in Anglo-Saxon history, and the absence of any marked didactic purpose. Henry doubtless believed history useful, but he wrote history chiefly because he was interested in it, and he was willing to sacrifice a good deal for the successful completion of what seems to have become the chief ambition of his life. H e had something of the devotion to his subject characteristic of the true historian, the spirit that in a great contemporary produced the Decline and Fall, so that there is in his work a solidity of knowledge and an atmosphere of industry in striking contrast to the brilliant superficiality o f Hume. Success did not come until he had conquered indifference and active opposition. N o publisher would touch the earlier volumes, which therefore appeared at the author's expense. Then when Hume, with his usual good-natured encouragement of his own rivals, wrote a laudatory review of the second volume for Gilbert Stuart's Edinburgh Magazine and Review, Stuart refused to print it, substituting instead a vitriolic attack from his own pen. Stuart also wrote to London suggesting that similar onslaughts be inserted in English journals. 10 The reason for this behavior is not clear, 9 H e spoke not unfavorably of medieval poetry and used W a r t o n ' s History of Poetry and P e r c y ' s Reliques extensively. Ossian was referred to frequently by H e n r y w h o said that in " Dr. Blair's Dissertation on the Poems of Ossian . . . the reader will find the genuineness of Ossian's Poems f u l l y established." (Op. cit., vol. ii, p. 174, note 204). H e regretted that w e are able to see our A n g l o - S a x o n ancestors only through the medium of " bigotted and gloomy m o n k s " (ibid., vol. iv, p. 298). 1 0 Stuart's review appeared in the issues of February and March, 1774, that is, vol. i, pp. 199-207, 264-270. H e assailed Henry's style, learning, and accuracy, saying, among much of the same sort, " A v o i d i n g with care, whatever was w o r t h y to excite curiosity, he has amassed all the refuse

38

TRANSITION

IN ENGLISH

HISTORICAL

WRITING

although we know that Stuart looked upon all Edinburgh intellectual circles with a jaundiced eye, but the immediate effect upon the reception of poor Henry's work was very bad. Happily it wore off and he became a respected, even popular author and was finally given £3300 for the copyright of his work. 1 1 It was perhaps more prominent on the student's desk than the lady's dressing table, but as a work of reference maintained its place for a good many years, besides stimulating the production of other histories on the same or a similar plan. 12 A fairly accurate and learned writer for his time, Henry's influence would have been very great indeed had he possessed more style and some philosophic insight. Given imagination and literary gifts he might have been the John Richard Green of the period. Henry died before getting beyond 1547, but his work was continued to 1603 by James Pettit Andrews 1 3 who followed Henry's plan while introducing more literary material and a great many anecdotes, of which he had already published a collection. The same author's History of Great Britain connected with the Chronology of Europe ( 1 7 9 4 - 1 7 9 5 ) gave in annalistic form the events of British history on one page and and lumber of the times he would record." T h e persecution of Henry by Stuart is described, w i t h quotations f r o m Stuart's letters, in Isaac Disraeli, Calamities and Quarrels of Authors, a new edition edited by his son the Earl of Beaconsfield (London, 1867), pp. 130-139. 11

A . S. Collins, Authorship

in the Days of Johnson

(London, 1927),

P- 3413 T. F. Dibdin says (Reminiscences of a Literary Life, London, 1836, vol. i, p. 90) : " But Henry's H i s t o r y was the sort of ' Hortus Adonidis ' from which I strove to gather ripe and unperishing fruit. H e was always on my table; and when I could, his authorities were by the side of him. H u m e w a s m y sofa companion . . . " 13 History of Great Britain, from the death of Henry VIII to the accession of James VI of Scotland to the Crown of England. Being a continuation of Dr. Henry's History of Great Britain, and written on the same plan ( v o l u m e i, London, 1796. N o more published).

RATIONALIST

HISTORY

39

on the opposite page contemporary happenings on the Continent. There were notes to contain events of minor importance, while to each Book, except the first " which comprising only a barbarous and dark epoch, affords materials only for one supplement," 14 were added two appendices containing a chronicle of literature with the lives of writers and specimens of their works, and an analysis of manners, religion, government and similar topics. Although he disclaimed originality and research, Andrews was in fact rather proud of the " novelty " of his plan. It was a good idea to link British and continental history, but the practice of compiling annalistic histories had already been made familiar by men like Hénault 1 5 in France and Dalrymple 16 in Great Britain. In his choice of material Andrews leaned heavily on Henry. The first general history of English law was written by John Reeves (History of English Law, 1783-1829) who was chief justice of Newfoundland from 1791 to 1792, later king's printer, and one of the strongest opponents of the spread of French Revolutionary sentiments in England. " If the first blow against French ideas had been struck by Burke, the second was struck by Reeves," 17 who founded a well-known association against the English supporters of the French Revolution. He was also author of Thoughts on the English Government ( 1 7 9 5 ) , an eighty-page pamphlet glorifying the national character of the English and their constitution, pronouncing the French a people unfit for lib14 The History of Great Britain conflicted with the Chronology Europe (one volume in t w o parts, London, 1794-1795), p. vi, note.

of

1 5 Hénault, Charles Jean François, Abrégé chronologique de l'histoire de France ( f r o m Clovis to Louis X I V ) , Paris, 1744. Translated into English, 1762. E . Fueter, op. cit., pp. 145-146. 1 6 Sir D a v i d Dalrymple, Annals Malcolm III, surnamed Canmore, Stewart (Edinburgh, 1776, 1779). 17

G. P . Gooch, in Cambridge

of Scotland from the Accession to the Accession of the House

Modern

History,

vol. viii, p. 760.

of of

4o

TRANSITION

IN ENGLISH

HISTORICAL

WRITING

erty, a perpetual menace to the peace of Europe, and their Revolution a judgment of God for their violence and fraud. This was not unpopular doctrine in 1795, but Reeves' Tory opinions carried him too far and he was finally put on trial for having magnified too greatly the royal prerogative. Although a disciple of Montesquieu, Reeves was more directly stimulated to write a history of English law by the closing chapter in Blackstone's Commentaries where an outline for such a work is given. 18 His aims were purely historical: I found [he says] that modern writers, in discoursing of the ancient law, were too apt to speak in modern terms, and generally with a reference to some modern usage. Hence it followed, that what they adduced was too often distorted and misrepresented, with a view to displaying, and accounting for, certain coincidences in the law at different periods. As this had a tendency to produce very great mistakes, it appeared to me, that, in order to have a right conception of our old jurisprudence, it would be necessary to forget for a while every alteration which had been made since, to enter upon it with a mind wholly unprejudiced, and to peruse it with the same attention that is bestowed on a system of modern law. The law of the time would then be learned in the language of the time, untinctured with new opinions; and when that was clearly understood, the alterations made therein in subsequent periods, might be deduced, and exhibited to the mind of a modern jurist in the true colours in which they appeared to persons who lived in those respective periods..18 The first edition of the History ( 1 7 8 3 - 1 7 8 4 ) stopped at 1509, but to the second, revised, edition ( 1 7 8 7 ) was added a section to the death of Mary. More than a generation 18 William Blackstone, Commentaries 1765-69), vol. iv, pp. 400-436. 19

v-vi.

History

of English

Law

on the laws of England

(Oxford,

(London, 1783-1829), vol. i, Preface, pp.

RATIONALIST

HISTORY

41

passed before the fifth and last volume, covering the reign of Elizabeth, appeared in 1829. Although the book had the misfortune to be badly edited by Finlason, in 1869, it remained standard until superseded by Pollock and Maitland 20 ( f o r the period before Edward I ) and Holdsworth. 21 Both Maitland and Holdsworth have assessed with the assurance of masters the merits and shortcomings of the man whose work they have themselves supplanted.22 They pay him the respect due to a pioneer in a difficult field. His was the first complete history of English law to the end of Elizabeth. Along with good abstracts of old authorities, it contained a careful account of the history of writs, and of procedure and pleading; while there was a commendably sceptical approach to such topics as the authorship of the Mirror of Justices and the possibility of an Anglo-Saxon origin of the jury. Against such merits, his critics placed the striking absence of large views, combined with so little sense of proportion that minute technicalities were described at " inordinate length." The division by reigns does not begin until 1216—not even those of Henry I and Henry I I are distinguished—while, as Finlason remarked, 23 by incorporating the whole of Glanville and large parts of Bracton, Reeves had confused the materials of history with history itself. Worse than his dullness, is the fact that he confined himself to printed books and there only to purely legal ones. He ignores the connection between law and other sides of national development. " The only ideas which he discusses 20

F. Pollock and F. W. Maitland, The History of English Law before the Time of Edward I. (Cambridge, 1895). 21 W. S. Holdsworth, A History 1903 et seq.)

of English

Laiv

(9 vols., London,

22 Maitland, Collected Papers (Cambridge, 1 9 1 1 ) , vol. ii, p. 6; Holdsworth, Historians of Anglo-American Law (New York, 1928), pp. 61-64. 23

In a note to vol. i, p. xi of the 1869 edition.

42

TRANSITION

IN ENGLISH

HISTORICAL

are the technical ideas of the common law.

WRITING

These, coupled

with bald narratives of events, summaries of statutes, and a slight account of the literature of the law at different periods, make up the b o o k . "

T h u s to quote Maitland, " no at-

24

tempt is made to show the real, practical meaning of ancient rules, which are left to look like so many arbitrary canons of a game of chance."

25

It is no wonder, a f t e r this, that

even apart f r o m the increase in materials available f o r such w o r k the history of English law had to be done over in the next century. Reeves w a s also the author of a History Shipping

and Navigation

of the Law

of

( 1 7 9 2 ) , in which he argued in

f a v o r o f the N a v i g a t i o n A c t s as the sources and guarantee of British trade and maritime p o w e r ; and of a History Government

of

the

Island

of

Newfoundland

of the

(1793)-

Neither of these w o r k s was of great importance, but the second derived some interest f r o m the fact that its author had examined the documents relating to N e w f o u n d l a n d belonging to the B o a r d of Trade, and had gone through the register of the committee of the Council for T r a d e and Plantations.

It w a s still useful to a recent historian o f

the

island. 28 T h e fame of Robertson's Charles

V made it almost inevit-

able that someone should soon undertake a history o f the reign of Philip II.

Robert W a t s o n , a Scottish clergyman

and principal of St. Salvator's College in Aberdeen, w a s long remembered f o r h a v i n g done this; but between his Philip ( 1 7 7 7 ) and Robertson's Charles difference.

II

V there was a world of

W a t s o n had a vivid narrative style, no small

factor in the astonishing renown he gained, but he w a s no 24

Holdsworth, Historians

25

Maitland, Collected

of the Anglo-American

Law, pp. 62-63.

Papers, vol. ii, p. 6.

2 8 Daniel W . Prowse, History of Newfoundland Colonial and Foreign Records (London, 1895).

from

the

English,

RATIONALIST

HISTORY

43

historian. T o a large extent he used secondary authorities in a work purporting to be a serious contribution to history. He had no sense of proportion or of the relative importance of events in Philip's reign. He devoted nearly three-quarters of his space to the Netherlands Revolt and omitted overseas affairs entirely. For this omission he could plead the precedent of Robertson, but this does not make the fact more excusable in a work intended to be a history of one of the most important eras of the Spanish Empire. The fact that Watson treated the Netherlands in detail was perhaps one cause of his success at a time when a similar revolt was taking place in the British Empire, but he was detailed rather than illuminating, for he narrates only the surface events of war and politics and allows his picture to be deeply colored by bias against Roman Catholicism, the Spaniards, and Philip himself. 27 He never forgot, or at least we are never able to forget, that he was a Protestant clergyman and a patriotic Briton. The personality of one of the most important, if one of the least amiable, of the Spanish monarchs is made no clearer from reading Watson. On the contrary, he has been called one of the two writers most responsible for obscuring the truth about Philip. 28 Prescott, who could certainly speak with authority, criticised Watson severely in private letters although he speaks with more reserve in the preface to his

own Philip II:29 27

He commended Philip, however, for his " magnanimous behaviour on the defeat of the Armada," History of the Reign of Philip the Second (6th edition, London, 1803), vol. iii, pp. 140-141. 28 H . Forneron, Histoire de Philippe II ( 1 8 8 1 ) , vol. i, pp. 392, as cited by W . Hunt in Cambridge History of English Literature (Catmbridge, 1 9 2 1 ) , vol. x, p. 291, note 2. 29 W . Prescott, History of Philip II (London, 1873), Preface, pp. iiii v ; R o g e r Wolcott, ed., Correspondence of William H. Prescott, 18331847 (Boston and N . Y . , 1925), vol. ii, pp. 51-52, 1 1 9 ; G. Ticknor, Life of William Hickling Prescott (Boston, 1884), p. 89, note 13.

44

TRANSITION

IN ENGLISH

HISTORICAL

WRITING

W h e n he died W a t s o n left behind an unfinished account of the reign of Philip III, which was rapidly completed by William Thomson and published in 1783. The whole of the second volume seems to have been by Thomson. Although a hack writer forced to write with great rapidity, Thomson possessed at least t w o advantages over Watson. First, he was not particularly biassed against the Spanish character or religion. O n the contrary, he goes so far as to compare the spirit of the Spanish missionaries in the New W o r l d with that of the early Christians in its zeal and purity of motive. 30 In addition to this, he finally came to see that no account of the reign of a Spanish king in the seventeenth century could be complete if it ignored maritime and colonial affairs and he accordingly added a section on them to the third edition. O n the other hand, he suffered from a rather tortuous style, an inclination to digression and to that type of " philosophical reflections," common enough at this time, which, not arising naturally from the main current of his theme, detracted from the straightforwardness of his narrative without aiding the reader's understanding of events. Only a man who was being paid by the sheet could introduce Spanish intervention in the Thirty Years' war with nearly a hundred pages on the remote origins and early progress of that struggle. Y e t because the reign of Philip III had been little cultivated this joint work by Watson and Thomson won a more lasting place than the former's Philip 7/. 31 The two outstanding historians of ancient Greece (Mitford and Gillies) may best be grouped with the spokesmen 30 The History of the Reign of Philip the Third, King of Spain, The first four books by Robert Watson ... The last two by William Thomson (3rd edition, 2 vols., London, 1808), vol. ii, pp. 320-322. 3 1 F o r example, the eleventh edition of the Encyclopacdia Britannica refers to W a t s o n and T h o m s o n as " the most available a c c o u n t " of Philip I l l ' s reign, while Watson's Fhilip II is not referred to at all.

RATIONALIST

HISTORY

45

of party philosophies. But a third student of ancient times deserves brief mention in this place. John Gast was an Anglican clergyman in Ireland who studied history for its moral lessons (virtue brings happiness, and vice ruin), its evidence of a superintending Providence, and its illustration of the excellence of the British Constitution. A s early as 1 7 5 3 he composed a history of Greece in dialogue form, which is said to have been very successful, but became rare at an early date. He then planned a larger work on Greece from the earliest times to the Turkish Conquest, in three quarto volumes, two on Greece proper and one on Alexander's successors in Egypt and Asia. Although the first two were published between 1782 and 1 7 9 3 , the most novel part of the enterprise, the section on Hellenistic Egypt and Asia, was unfortunately never realized. 32 But the fact that his plan recognized the importance of a field not yet fully cultivated is almost his only claim to remembrance. His style was arid and his scholarship was shallow. Working amid the innumerable cares of parish life, he could hardly have become truly learned even if this had been his primary aim; and so f a r was he from possessing a sense for historical evidence and criticism that he used Old Testament prophecies to explain events in the reign of Alexander the Great. He was one of the first to write a connected history of Greece, on a large scale at least, for English readers; but he was quickly overwhelmed by the competition of Gillies and Mitford, to whom we shall turn later, both of whom were better writers, more learned, and more intelligent in their use of historical sources. Adam Ferguson, of whose earlier work something has 32

A volume containing the History of Greece from the Accession of Alexander of Macedon till its final subjection to the Roman power, with a brief epitome to 1453, came out in 1782. This was republished at Dublin in 1793 (posthumously), along with a volume to the accession of Alexander.

46

TRANSITION

IN ENGLISH

HISTORICAL

WRITING

already been said, w a s also well-known as the author o f a History public

of the Progress (1782).

and Termination

of the Roman

Re-

T h e title and date of publication suggest

emulation of Gibbon, but the author appears to have been at w o r k some years b e f o r e 1776. 3 8 by-product

of

those

T h e History

philosophical

and

w h i c h were F e r g u s o n ' s main concern.

was the

didactic

interests

H e believed that in

the R o m a n Republic could be found the richest mine of examples and precepts for the student and statesman, and he sought to give a plain narrative of political and military events, without much comment, so that the reader could draw his own conclusions. 34 In view o f the fact that F e r g u s o n was not aiming at scholarship in the pure sense of the term, it is perhaps not surprising that Niebuhr's judgment on the R o m a n history, contained in his o w n lectures on that subject delivered as the era of

scientific history

uous one. 35

was

dawning,

was a

contempt-

H e condemned F e r g u s o n f o r lack of research,

f o r a proneness to moralizing, andxfor h a v i n g slighted the early history of Rome.

" T o those w h o w a n t to acquire a

knowledge o f R o m a n history," he concluded, " the book is worth nothing." 33

36

N o w it is true that F e r g u s o n did not

H e w r o t e t o Gibbon, A p r i l 18, 1776: " I h a v e , as y o u suppose, been

e m p l o y e d , at a n y i n t e r v a l s of leisure or rest I h a v e had f o r s o m e years, in t a k i n g n o t e s , or c o l l e c t i n g m a t e r i a l s , f o r a H i s t o r y o f the distractions t h a t broke d o w n the R o m a n Republic, and ended in t h e e s t a b l i s h m e n t of Augustus Works

and

his

(London,

immediate

successors."

1814), vol. ii, p. 163.

E.

Gibbon,

Miscellaneous

O n F e r g u s o n see a l s o

supra,

PP- 15-1734

See John

Small,

b u r g h , 1864), p. 44. the 35

times

Skctch

of

Adam

Ferguson

(Edin-

History. B. G. N i e b u h r , Lectures to the fall

1 8 7 0 ) , p. 5438

Biographical

A l s o the p r e f a c e t o v o l u m e i o f the 1813 e d i t i o n of

Ibid., p. 54.

on the History

of the Western

Empire

of Rome

from

the

earliest

( e d i t e d by L. S c h m i t z , L o n d o n ,

RATIONALIST

HISTORY

47

uncover new material, but it is a permissible aim to present a digest o f what is already known and this Ferguson did with sufficient skill to rival if not to displace Hooke's earlier compilation. 37 It is true, also, that the period before the Gracchi was scantily treated, but after all Ferguson was not writing a complete history of Rome, but of a definite period or phase of that history, and he limits his field much as Ferrero has done in modern times. Moreover, Ferguson saw, though he was not the first to do so, that the generally accepted account of early Rome rested on insecure foundations. 38 Writers like Fabius and Cato, he pointed out, were largely dependent on tradition and mainly useful only when they had drawn upon Greek accounts contemporary with events in Roman history. L i v y was in much the same position, himself drawing on Fabius and Cato, while Plutarch used Livy, Dionysius, or the authors upon whom they themselves rested. Therefore, Ferguson reasoned, a connected history of the early period could not be written, but only a narrative of such facts as tradition was competent to supply—events striking enough to remain in public memory. He is to be commended for having recognized these difficulties and for having refused to enter upon difficult ground with which he was unfamiliar. Indeed, not17 K e w editions of the History in 5 volumes, appeared in 1799, 1813, 1825 and also a one-volume edition in 1825. German translation, 17&41786. F r e n c h translation, 1784-1791, with a second French edition 18031810. 3 8 Ferguson discussed the authorities for the early history of Rome in the P r e f a c e to the 1813 edition of his History. There had previously been carried on in the French Academy of Inscriptions, through a series of years beginning in 1720, a debate on the reliability of ancient history. T h i s resulted in Louis de Beaufort's well known Dissertation sur I'incertitude des cinq premiers siecles de I'Histoire Romaine (Utrecht, 1738), a w o r k in which the author maintained a sceptical view. See R. Flint, Historical Philosophy in Prance and French Belyium and Switzerland ( N e w Y o r k , 1894), pp. 254-261.

48

TRANSITION

IN ENGLISH

HISTORICAL

WRITING

withstanding the critical genius of N i e b u h r and the a m a z i n g progress of a century, it is perhaps still true to say that the assured history of R o m e does not begin until the fourth o r third century.

In so far as F e r g u s o n w o r k e d in a less credu-

lous spirit than H o o k e , he marked a genuine advance in R o m a n studies.

In England, in France, and in G e r m a n y , he

held his circle of readers until well into the nineteenth century, even a f t e r modern research had begun the process o f t r a n s f o r m i n g R o m a n history into what it has since become. A modern writer has said that our interest in H u m e as an historian arises not f r o m his learning or research, but f r o m the fact that his was " perhaps the acutest intellect ever applied to E n g l i s h history " not the scholar.

39—we

are d r a w n by the thinker,

In somewhat the same w a y we are interested

in ascertaining the views of R o m a n history taken by F e r guson who, it will be remembered, occupied a subordinate place in the Scottish philosophical Pantheon whose m a j o r god w a s H u m e .

It w a s so even in the eighteenth century,

f o r although F e r g u s o n professed to be ambitious solely o f g i v i n g a simple digest o f the facts, in most cases w i t h o u t expressing his o w n opinion or seeking to w o r k towards a n y interpretation o f the facts, he received credit chiefly f o r h a v ing " turned the searchlight of philosophy on one o f greatest events in history."

40

the

It is never difficult to trace

F e r g u s o n ' s o w n views amid his detail of events or analysis o f characters; and by these as well as his by o w n scholarship we are able to estimate his place in historiography. A t times, he seems to be on the verge o f g i v i n g an interpretation of the fall of the Republic in terms of historical circumstance, in a manner quite respectable even to the present day. 39

H e maintains that the era of conquest had

H u m e Brown, History

Robert Bisset, History vol. iv, p. 58. 40

of Scotland

(Cambridge, 1 9 1 1 ) , vol. iii, p. 298.

of the Reign

of George

III

(London, 1803),

RATIONALIST

HISTORY

49

brought the R o m a n s face to face with the complex problems of Empire a t a time w h e n the social discipline of the people had declined t h r o u g h the l u x u r y and corruption introduced f r o m abroad.

T o g o v e r n the Empire, the Republican f o r m

of government, adequate enough f o r the quite different conditions under which it had arisen, needed drastic r e f o r m . F r o m this point of v i e w , it w a s those w h o attempted to preserve the Republic rather than those w h o sought its overthrow, whose conduct needed vindication.

T h e r e is much in

this argument that s h o w s an accurate diagnosis; modern historians seem to agree that foreign conquest would necessarily change the institutions at R o m e and that the Empire could only be preserved thereby. confine himself to diagnosis.

But F e r g u s o n could not

H e was full of prepossessions

f o r the Senate and of sentiments about " liberty," " t y r a n n y , " and " virtue " — t h e stock in trade of an eighteenth-century libertarian.

Hence we find him indulging in an eulogy of

the Senate in which he d e c l a r e d : 4 1 If ever there was a body of men fit to govern the world, it was the Roman Senate, composed of citizens who had passed through the higher offices of state, who had studied the affairs of their country, in the execution of its councils, and in the command of its armies; and it will be for ever remembered, in behalf of those who wished to preserve its authority, that if their removal from the scene on which they acted was expedient or seasonable, it was so because that scene was become unworthy of their presence. Here, F e r g u s o n is no longer the historian, content to analyse, but the moralist passing judgment. customary

T h i s is his more

role, and hence w e are not surprised to

M a r i u s , P o m p e y and Caesar roundly condemned.

find

Caesar,

4 1 A . Ferguson, History of the Progress and Termination of the Roman Republic (new edition, Edinburgh, 1813), vol. v, pp. 72-73.

50

TRANSITION

IN ENGLISH

HISTORICAL

WRITING

he said, had supreme genius, but employed his abilities to subdue fellow citizens w i t h w h o m he ought to have lived on terms o f equality.

T h e r e f o r e they slew him, a sacrifice to

their " j u s t indignation," and, 4 2 a striking example of what the arrogant have to fear in trifling with the feelings of men whom they ought to respect, and at the same time a lesson of jealousy and of cruelty to tyrants, or a warning which they are but too willing to take in the exercise of their powers, not to spare those whom they may have insulted by their vile usurpations. Because of his proneness to indulge in such sentiments, with respect both to the figures of late Republican days and in his short survey of the early Empire, Ferguson the historian was submerged by F e r g u s o n the moralist.

T h i s was

not an obstacle to his contemporary fame, but it has been fatal to his subsequent reputation. C o m p a r e d w i t h their predecessors, the historians of the E n l i g h t e n m e n t were broad in their interests, but their enthusiasm w a s bounded by those topics which concerned the rising bourgeoisie f o r w h o m they worked.

F o r as the revolutions

of the eighteenth century produced middle-class states, so the writers of that day produced middle-class histories.

Some

a m o n g them had risen f r o m the uneducated and exploited masses to the distinction of a literary career, 43 but of all these there w a s not f o u n d one to undertake the history of the poor or of poverty.

It is true, of course, that their description

of manners and customs of the past included some of those of the lower classes, and an occasional note of awareness of 42

Ibid., vol. iv, p. 151.

F o r example, Robert H e r o n (infra, pp. 148-150), John Bigland, and W i l l i a m Russell ( i n f r a , pp. 65-68; 123-124). Bigland was author of many popular historical w o r k s of the early nineteenth century. H e gives an interesting account of his early life in Memoir of the life of John Bigland . . . Written by Himself (Doncaster, 1830). 13

RATIONALIST

HISTORY

the part they played in history made itself heard. Logan, as we shall see in a moment, asks why more is not said about " the people," though he does not explain clearly what he means; and later John Bigland, a fertile author of popular works, shows some interest in the unchronicled majority." But the first person who set himself the task of giving the historical background of poverty in a large way seems to have been the benevolent aristocrat, Sir Frederic Morton Eden, whose great work, The State of the Poor ( 1 7 9 7 ) , was the direct result of the hard times of 1794 and 1795. His main concern was to give a statistical account of selected English parishes at the end of the eighteenth century, but the better to understand the conditions he found he devoted some four hundred pages (quarto) of the first volume to the historical background. Useful for the documents and digests it contained, this was nevertheless not an adequate history either of poverty or of the poor. It is closely confined to official documents, never rises above a mere detail of facts, and possesses no literary merit. We can well believe Eden's statement that he never spent time looking for another word when he could spend it looking for another fact. Nor, it need hardly be said, can Eden's work be regarded as a precursor of recent attempts to look at history from the viewpoint of the " proletariat." But that Eden was not isolated in his concern with the historical background of poverty may be seen from Thomas Kuggles. Ruggles was a justice of the peace in Ireland who worked at his History of the Poor ( 1 7 9 3 - 1 7 9 4 ) to while away the solitary hours of a rural winter. He was chiefly 44 Bigland, in his History of England to 1815 (London, 1 8 1 5 ) , protests against the neglect of the populace in " our ancient annalists " and their anti-popular tone. He complains that they are most unfair to the people and virulent in denunciation of the struggles f o r popular liberty which were really more important than the languid wars of many monarchs (vol. i, pp. 618-619, 620 et seq.).

52

TRANSITION

IN ENGLISH

HISTORICAL

WRITING

interested in discovering why agriculturalists were poor and what the remedy, if any, was. Do physical or social causes explain this phenomenon? T o answer this question, he proposed a summary account of the " duties of the poor to, and their claims from, society " from the earliest times, followed by a " transient view " of the ideas of those who had written on the subject in various ages. Actually the historical part of Ruggles was quite slight, and if he possessed any importance now it would be for his reflections on his own time. The interest in comparative and " conjectural " history displayed by men like Hume, Ferguson and Millar in the writings earlier mentioned was not followed up in any large way in later years. But a minor example of a similar approach is James Dunbar's Essays on the History of Mankind in Rude and Cultivated Ages (2nd edition, 1 7 8 1 ) . Dunbar abandoned a purely chronological arrangement because he saw that " degeneracy, as well as improvement, is incidental to man," 45 so that some ages are more backward than others that preceded them. A t the same time he believed that progress is in the long run the distinctive feature of history and he sought to explain the factors operating in the process. He has been praised for not ignoring the factor of heredity and for his anticipation of the League of Nations, 46 but in general he repeats the ideas about climate, environment, and so on that were commonplace in his own day. Of more direct interest was John Logan's Elements of the Philosophy of History, Part First ( 1 7 8 1 ) , comprising a syllabus of some lectures delivered before Scottish audiences under the auspices of Robertson, Blair, and other dignitaries. Logan was a clergyman, evidently of considerable ability, whose career was ruined by drink and melancholia. The detailed syllabus shows that he began his course by a brief 45

Essays

49

J . B . B u r y , The Idea of Progress

on the History

of Mankind

(2d edition, London, 1 7 8 1 ) , p. 3. (London, 1 9 2 0 ) , p. 364.

RATIONALIST

HISTORY

53

consideration of some of the principles that must guide the worker who attempts to reconstruct the history of society a f t e r the fashion of the " conjectural " school. One of these is that " the arrangements and improvements which take place in human affairs result not f r o m the efforts of individuals, but f r o m a movement of the whole society " 47 so that the historian should investigate the story of peoples rather than remain a mere panegyrist or recorder of " great men." From want of attention to this principle History hath often degenerated into the panegyric of single men, and the worship of names. Law-givers are recorded, but who makes mention of the people? . . . [Yet] Poetry, Philosophy, the Fine Arts, national manners and customs, result from the situation and spirit of a people. . . . All that Legislators, Patriots, Philosophers, Statesmen, and Kings can do, is to give a direction to that stream which is forever flowing.48 Arising f r o m this was the second principle that all parts of society are one—literature, philosophy, fine arts, manners and customs, each influencing the development of the others. A third principle was that national character is formed by a combination of physical and moral causes; a f o u r t h that progress is inherently characteristic of the h u m a n race, giving the real key to history. F r o m these principles, Logan proceeded to lecture on various stages of history. F r o m barbarous society he passed to a consideration of Asiatic civilization with its claim to a high antiquity, f r o m Asia to Egypt, and thence to Greece. H e r e he evidently felt on firmer ground, for he begins to include more narrative, more history in the stricter sense of dealing with specific facts and particular situations capable of comprehension with the materials at hand. But his main interest 47

Elements

*»lbid.,

of the Philosophy

p. 16.

of History,

pp. 14-15.

54

TRANSITION

IN ENGLISH

HISTORICAL

WRITING

was to ascertain the general factors basic in all social change, as exemplified in specific happenings like the decline of Greece or the rise and decline of Rome. Nor do his explanations bear out the claims for the use of the inductive method and the recognition of social forces he had made in the beginning. The decline of the Roman Empire is a topic in dealing with which the eighteenth century revealed its limitations of outlook more than in any other w a y ; Logan gives us the same story of decaying virtue as so many other writers of that time. It may seem unfair to judge him without the full text of his lectures at our disposal, but his syllabus is elaborate enough to temper our regret that the lectures themselves were never published. Y e t since they were delivered before public audiences, with sufficient success to warrant the printing of a full outline of the first part, they serve as an illustration of the way in which the ideas of the " N e w History " were popularized. William Marsden's History of Sumatra ( 1 7 8 3 ) belied its name since it was really a description of contemporary Sumatra intended as raw material for philosophers investigating the natural history of society. 49 It was apparently the first English work on Sumatra and has been serviceable to later students for this reason. It was one of the numerous class of travel accounts so important to the eighteenth-century social sciences. The influence of rationalistic ideas of history appeared clearly in several manuals, one or two of which remained in use for a long time, both reflecting and helping shape prevailing attitudes. A most effective writer of such books was the Reverend John Adams, a Scottish clergyman long resident in and about London, the plan of whose textbook of English history was admittedly based on Henry. 5 0 49

History

80

of Sumatra

A New History

(London, 1783), pp. vii-viii, 373-375.

of Great Britain,

from the invasion of Julius

Caesar

RATIONALIST

HISTORY

55

T h e resemblance is close. There is the same division into books and chapters, each dealing with a specific aspect of one period, and the same breadth of subjects included. The happy pupil who learned from Adams, and the number must have been legion judging from the editions that appeared, was told when potatoes arrived in Europe, when silk stockings were first worn, universities founded, coaches introduced, half pence and farthings first coined, inoculation for smallpox discovered, and the Royal Institution founded. He studied the reign of fashion as well as the reigns of kings, and followed the record of discovery as well as the story of war. It is true that the relative importance and the causes of the events of which he read were not always pointed out to him—the book has some of those defects noted in H e n r y — b u t as long as school history was to be mainly a chronicle of facts it was well that the facts should be selected from different fields. In the case of Adams' manual they possessed some human interest and related to matters with which the pupil might be in daily contact. Moreover, Adams kept bringing his History up to date in successive editions. Indeed one is inclined to marvel at its progressive character in this respect when one thinks of many widely used textbooks in later days and reflects that it was for long scarcely respectable to evince any interest in the century just previous to the pupil's birth. Henry was not the only writer whom Adams brought before a wider audience. In 1789 he issued Curious Thoughts on the History of Man, Chiefly abridged or selected from the celebrated works of Lord Kaimes, Lord Monboddo. Dr. Dunbar, and the immortal Montesquieu, which was " designed to promote a spirit of enquiry in the British youth to the present time . . . on a plan nearly similar to that of Dr. Henry (London, 1802). I have used the 5th edition (London, 1818). O n H e n r y see supra, pp. 34-38.

56

TRANSITION

IN ENGLISH

HISTORICAL

WRITING

of both sexes, and to make the philosophy, as well as history of the human species, familiar to ordinary capacities." 51 This modest aim was to be realized by a short and simple digest of the best thought of the day on such topics as the social nature of man, the chief causes which gave rise to civil society, population, property, language, the influence of war on human character, the effect of persecution and opulence on manners, and of climate cm the human constitution. It is true that the author retailed information, or better, theories, rather than stimulated thought, but no one has yet discovered an infallible secret for imparting the " incurable disease of thought." One is rather surprised at the attractive and modern character of Adams' books than inclined to carping criticism. Similar in aim was a work with the inclusive title, Elements of Useful Knowledge ( 1 7 9 3 ) , a kind of " survey " course designed to lay the foundations of a liberal education. Beginning with a sketch of astronomy and its application in proving the existence of God, Adams then gave rapid summaries of mythology, chronology, the memorable events from Creation to the end of the eighteenth century, rhetoric, metallurgy, climatology, and the British Constitution, ending with a chapter of miscellaneous information. T o this was appended a brief account of the trial and execution of Louis X V I and the recent ( 1 7 9 3 ) transactions in France. Since the book was meant mainly to be committed to memory, the pupil who survived might be expected to hold his own in almost any company. Adams was the author of other works of an historical or near historical character. His View of Universal History, from the Creation to the Present Time ( 1 7 9 5 ) did not belie its name, for it included, besides the more important countries, Sweden, Denmark, Norway, Greenland, Iceland, Lap51

From the full title of the Curious Thoughts on the History of Man.

RATIONALIST

HISTORY

57

land, Russia, Poland, Arabia, China, Tartary, India, Japan, Mexico, and the South American countries, and, in Adams' customary style, concluded with a survey of world conditions at the time of writing. The book was more uninteresting in its selection of material and its mode of treatment—the countries were taken up seriatim—than the English history. Adams did not, in fact, any more than Henry, possess a sense of the unity of History: there was no guiding line in it for him. The Flowers of Ancient History ( 1 7 8 8 ) sought to abandon a narrative of events in chronological order for a discussion at greater length of selected transactions. It was of course compiled from larger histories, but reflects considerable breadth of interests, including in its scope Confucius and Sadi as well as the heroes of Greece and Rome. The Flowers of Modern History ( 1 7 8 8 ) dealt with the period since the barbarian invasions. Adams was also the author of an abridgment of Gibbon, in two volumes, a collection of extracts from the works of celebrated travelers, and several other books less closely related to history. 52 Ideas similar to those of Adams were expounded for more advanced students by Joseph Priestley. From 1 7 6 1 to 1 7 6 7 Priestley was a tutor at the Dissenting Academy of Warrington. His duty was to teach languages, but he felt so strongly the need of instruction in History and Political Science that he himself undertook the work in those fields.53 In 1765 his Gibbon's History of the Dcclinc end Fall of the Roman Empire, in six volumes, quarto, abridged in two volumes, octavo (London, 1789). In the British Museum Catalogue Adams is credited with the authorship of Elements of Reading (London, 1781), Elegant Anecdotes and BonMots (new edition, London, 1790), The Flowers of Modem Travels (2 vols., Boston, 1797), Modern Voyages (2 vols., London, 1790). 53 Miss Irene Parker (Dissenting Academies in England, Cambridge, 1914, esp. pp. I33-I3S) has pointed out how the Dissenting Academies of the eighteenth century modernized the educational curriculum by includ-

58

TRANSITION

IN ENGLISH

HISTORICAL

WRITING

Essay on Education gave the syllabi for three courses of lectures, one a general introduction to the study of history, a second on English history, and a third on the laws and government of England. His course on English history was intended to supplement the usual account by linking together English and foreign history at appropriate points, and by stressing the non-political side. His plan was almost exactly that later adopted by Henry, viz., to divide the fields into periods and to digest the material for each under various heads. But Priestley's history of England, if he had ever written one, would probably have shown less research than H e n r y ' s ; though it would on the other hand have contained more acute reflections. According to Priestley, the appearance of Henry's work made the publication of his own lectures on English history unnecessary; while Blackstone's Commentaries forestalled his treatise ori law and government. Fortunately, however, he did publish, in 1788, the lectures in his first course. Originally in quarto, they became more familiar to the nineteenth century in the 1826 edition, a fat octavo of over five hundred and fifty pages. They remained in use, at least in America, almost to the end of the century. 54 Priestley began with a conventional discussion in three lectures of the use of history—it anticipates experience, strengthens virtue, stimulates to great deeds, enables us to understand human nature, and teaches the truths of religion. All these were of course commonplace to the historians of the century and were probably expounded by every teacher ing such subjects as history. in H . M c L a c h l a n , English History

of

the

T h e r e is much material on this topic also Education

Non-Conformist

under

Academics,

the Test

Acts.

1662-1820

Being

the

(Manchester,

19305 4 C. K . A d a m s in his A Manual of Historical Literature ( N e w Y o r k , 1882, p. 193) found the value of Priestley's Lectures on History " still very considerable."

RATIONALIST o f the subject.

HISTORY

59

M o r e important was his treatment o f the

sources o f history, a topic to which he devoted nine lectures. Quite in the modern manner, he explained the difference between direct and indirect sources, while stressing at the same time the immeasurable superiority o f

records over

material more liable to corruption through dishonesty and e r r o r — o r a l tradition and written accounts.

H e discussed

sensibly the use o f coins and medals, heraldry and placenames, illustrating each with definite examples.

I n his lec-

ture on indirect methods o f ascertaining historical fact, he showed the possibility o f learning f r o m the style in which a document or book is written; while the necessity for a close study o f chronology and the value o f a study o f law were also emphasized. F r o m sources, Priestley passed to a consideration in f o u r lectures o f the preparation in " auxiliary sciences " ( t o use our t e r m ) necessary to produce the good historian.

This

included in ideal, he said, a training in all the sciences.

But

even in practice the historian ought to be skilled in the knowledge o f human nature (psychology, we would call i t ) , in philosophy,

geography,

economics

and

statistics

("the

Methods o f estimating the Riches and P o w e r o f ancient and remote Nations " ) and numismatics. All this must have seemed like a counsel o f perfection to the students at W a r r i n g t o n Academy, who were probably a good deal more enthusiastic over the series o f " Directions for facilitating the study o f h i s t o r y , " comprising a discussion o f compendia and epitomes, chronological and genealogical tables, commonplace books, an outline o f historians

since

Herodotus and a solitary lecture on terms o f fortification. B u t the greater part o f the course was given over t o a brief treatment o f the most important topics to which the historical student

should direct his attention.

A m o n g these

were

biography, politics, manufacturing and commerce, forms and

6o

TRANSITION

IN ENGLISH

HISTORICAL

WRITING

problems of government and law, agriculture, the arts, colonies and colonization, money, luxury and manners, religion, population, war, and national finance. Well might Priestley conclude; " I t would be endless to point out every useful object of attention to a reader of history, as there is no branch of useful knowledge which history will not furnish materials for illustrating and extending." 55 Priestley is to be praised for his breadth of approach to history, as he has been praised by Sir Leslie Stephen for seeing the importance of the historical approach to the study of religion. 58 Yet as an historian he had serious defects which are clearly revealed in the book under consideration. He was keen rather than profound in his observations. Moreover, he was an advocate, constantly in the arena writing, speaking, disputing for his cherished beliefs in politics and religion, rather than a scholar solely concerned with the advancement of knowledge. So far as the Lectures on History are concerned, we must, however, remember their pedagogical purpose, which might justify a greater degree of positiveness in statement than in a more advanced and philosophical presentation of the study of history. Yet Priestley was more than pedagogically opinionated; he was strongly biassed and his biasses crop out constantly. Thus he was misled by his liberal views into recommending Mrs. Macaulay's History of England as a " masterly performance," whereas, as we shall have occasion to show later, it is really only a masterly example of how not to write history. On the other hand, in Priestley as in other writers, it is pos55 Lectures on History London, 1826), p. 541.

and General Policy

(new edition, by J. T . Rutt,

•r'6 Sir Leslie Stephen, History of English Thought in the Eighteenth Century (3rd edition reprinted, London, 1927), vol. i, p. 435. with reference to Priestley's History of the Corruptions of Christianity (Birmingham, 1782, 2 vols.).

RATIONALIST

HISTORY

61

sible to find prepossessions and prejudices leading to an appreciation of some aspects of history the significance of which might otherwise have been completely misunderstood. He was a staunch Unitarian with truly rationalistic contempt for the Catholicism of the Middle Ages. But his acceptance of the thesis of a providential guidance in history leading the race through error and pain to better things, made him look for the historical function of institutions with which he had otherwise little sympathy. Even evil, he says, is transmuted by the hand of God into good. " Popery " saved learning in the barbarian ages, and the monks by going into the desert places helped to establish towns. Again, there was hardly any event in history more calamitous than the Crusades, yet they were the great means of establishing the liberty of the lower orders, breaking the power of the barons and introducing much useful knowledge. Wars have scattered learning and spread civilization." Of course opinions like those just given are to be found also in Voltaire, 58 but Priestley's views of history had a stronger religious tinge; he was apt to give a religious interpretation even where he had derived the fact which he was explaining from Voltaire. As in the case of Voltaire, too, Asia rather than Europe seemed important to Priestley in the history of the Middle Ages. He was enormously impressed by events like the rise of the Saracens and the part they played in stimulating an intellectual revival " long before the Greek fugitives from Constantinople promoted a taste for eloquence and the belles-lettres." 59 Priestley was inclined to stress the importance of the Saracens because of their service to science, and to depreciate the Italian Renaissance because of its concern with literature. So pedestrian were 57

J . Priestley, Lectures on History,

58

See J . B. Black, op. cit., pp. 73-74.

c9

Priestley, op. cit., p. 289.

pp. 560-565, 569.

62

TRANSITION

IN ENGLISH

HISTORICAL

WRITING

his views of letters that he believed the production of poetry o u g h t to cease because the supply already at hand w a s greater than the a v e r a g e person could master, and the quality not likely to be improved upon.

A f t e r this it is perhaps not

necessary to say that Priestley had no special sense for the continuity o f history or appreciation of how institutions shape its course.

H e w a s like H u m e in that while he shows traces

o f an historical approach in some of his works, his efforts at f o r m a l history are dominated by a mechanical, atomistic conception of society. S o m e years b e f o r e the publication of

Priestley's book,

A l e x a n d e r F r a s e r T y t l e r w a s appointed professor of history in the U n i v e r s i t y o f E d i n b u r g h .

In 1782, he produced a

syllabus of lectures in universal history

60

of this w a s published, in 1 8 0 1 , as Elements tory.

L i k e Priestley's Lectures

popularity. 6 1

and an expansion of General

His-

this manual long retained its

D e f i n i n g history as the school of politics and

virtue, T y t l e r nevertheless included more than political history in his statement o f a i m s : 8 2 It is proposed to exhibit a progressive view of the state of mankind, from the earliest ages of which we have any authentic accounts to the beginning of the age in which we live; to delineate the origin of states and empires, the great outlines of their history, the revolutions which they have undergone, the causes which have contributed to their rise and grandeur, and operated to their decline and extinction. For these purposes, it is necessary to bestow attention particularly on the manners of nations, their laws, the nature of their government, their religion, their intellectual improvements, and progress in the arts and sciences. 6 0 A . F . T y t l e r , Plan and Outline of a course of Lectures on Universal History, ancient and modern, delivered in the University of Edinburgh (Edinburgh, 1782). 6 1 Seventeen editions of the Elements are cited in the British Museum Catalogue, the last in 1875, also an abridgment and several editions of parts of the w o r k . 62

Plan and Outline,

pp. 3-4.

RATIONALIST

HISTORY

63

In other words, while Tytler's goal is the explanation or description of political phenomena, he seeks the explanation in non-political causes. Yet he gave about four-fifths of his space to political history; nor did he grasp generally the connection of economic, social, and political phenomena—the most characteristic failure of this group. Tytler organized his lectures around the great states and empires that had appeared. In every period, he pointed out,88 some one state or people has been dominant, and to this dominant element may be referred the history of contemporary peoples and states. For example, after considering under the general head of Charlemagne's empire such topics as the rise of the Franks, the origin of the feudal system, the state of European manners, government, literature, arts and sciences, he next passed to a group of " collateral objects of attention " at this time. Among these were the Roman Empire in the East, the conquests and settlements of the Normans, the rise of the temporal dominion of the Church, and the Saracen conquest of Spain. The organization was thus topical within clearly recognizable chronological limits. He devoted some time to the history of the Far East, but on the other hand displayed a certain provincialism of outlook by disproportionate attention to British history. It is easy to explain why this manual should have remained in use so long. It was, in the first place, very comprehensive, at least in the sense of touching upon a wide variety of topics. It was also clearly and simply written; and it followed a middle course between the bare recital of facts and the philosophizing tendencies of many of its contemporaries. There was more " philosophy " in the Reverend George Thompson's Spirit of General History ( 1 7 9 1 ) , which also consisted of lectures, delivered before public audiences rather than before university classes. A work of compilation, it 63

Ibid., p. 9.

64

TRANSITION

IN ENGLISH

HISTORICAL

WRITING

drew heavily on writers like P u f e n d o r f , Bossuet, M o n t e s quieu, F e r g u s o n , Millot, Gibbon, and Strutt, thus m i n g l i n g the old and new.

T h o m p s o n w a s more interested in causes

than events, and he devoted too much space to E n g l a n d , but he actually manages to minimise politics and w a r more completely than w a s customary.

M o s t l y his views go back to

H u m e , V o l t a i r e , or some other giant, and are expressed w i t h little o r i g i n a l i t y ; but in t w o respects he presents something different.

H e w a s more conscious of the unity of history,

f r o m its b e g i n n i n g to its end, than most of those w h o w r o t e narrative history, though not perhaps than those w h o concerned themselves with the natural history of society.

In-

deed he is prophetic of Freeman in his formulation of this idea: The history of mankind from the beginning of the world to the present time, is a chain consisting of many links; and to strike off one, would be to discompose the whole. There is an intimate connection between ancient and modern history. These two parts may make up the whole. A n d though any part of history may be the object of our study, yet unless we view it in connection with the other parts, it cannot be studied with that advantage, it otherwise would. 94 In the second place, T h o m p s o n derived some distinction a m o n g these E n g l i s h writers in his emphasis upon the necessity of u s i n g history as a means to social r e f o r m .

H e saw

the reality o f ignorance and oppression beneath the veneer of enlightenment in the eighteenth century. he

said, 65

" B u t alas! "

" a t present a f e w only, comparatively speaking,

are enlightened, wise, and liberal; the greatest number are still ignorant, intolerant, and foolish."

In this condition he

found the true mission of history, which " should teach men 64

G. Thompson, Spirit of General History

05

Ibid., p. 432.

(Carlisle, 1791), p. 11.

RATIONALIST

HISTORY

65

to endeavor to remove the evils which are pernicious to society; to correct the faults of government, and establish public good upon a right foundation." e8 It was a commonplace that history should be useful, but ordinarily it was to be useful in teaching a vague " virtue," patriotism and obedience to constituted authority—at least among the English historians. N o t often at this time do we find this thoroughly modern note of history in the service of social betterment. One of the most widely read books was William Russell's History of Modern Europe from the Fall of the Roman Empire to 1763 ( 1 7 7 9 - 1 7 8 4 ) , cast in the form of "letters from a nobleman to his son," and intended as a manual for young students. For this purpose it continued to be used on both sides of the Atlantic during the better part of a century. Russell saw that Europe and the Europeanized parts of the world formed one community with a common history characterized by a progress from " rudeness to refinement " and he set himself to giving a simple account for young students. If simple, it was certainly not brief, since the book ran to five stout volumes, octavo. A f t e r a few preliminary remarks on the Roman Empire, strongly tinged with liberal ideas, the main account begins with Clovis. Although Russell declared that " the history of the human mind is of infinitely more importance than the detail of events," 67 and inserted chapters on commerce, navigation, colonization and letters, political events occupy eleven or twelve times as much space as social, economic, and intellectual affairs, another illustration of the extent to which achievement lagged behind aspiration among these innovating historians of the Enlightenment. In the same way, though not to the same degree, English affairs received a disproportionate emphasis as compared with 60

Ibid., p. 433-

The History of Modern Europe ( n e w ed., London, 1788), vol. i, p. 212. On Russell see also infra, pp. 123-124. 67

66

TRANSITION

IN ENGLISH

HISTORICAL

WRITING

those of the continent. In this he was quite in keeping with the practice of his contemporaries (in England) who were accustomed to profess a cosmopolitan outlook, but who were in practice more national in their sympathies than Continental historians. 68 Russell's treatment of the Middle Ages is a good example in brief compass of the change that was coming over historical writing in this respect and of which more examples will be given in a later chapter. On the one hand he reflects the disparagement of medieval civilization of which Hume was perhaps the leading representative. This is best illustrated in Russell's apology for not giving an extended account of medieval society, an enterprise which he compared to " travelling over barren mountains and uninhabited deserts, in search of the remote fountains of the Nile " when one could contemplate the " accumulated majesty of that river " as it flows through the rich and fertile plain.69 O n the other hand, that a changing attitude towards some phases at least of the Middle Ages was in the air at this time is suggested by favorable notice of the " beautiful extravagancies of romantic feeling," an appreciation of which the source is indicated as Warton's History of Poetry.70 Such references show how the nascent literary Romanticism was begining to influence the outlook of historians, but in general history lagged far behind literature in doing justice to the Middle A g e s ; nor must it be supposed that Russell's general tone towards that period was sympathetic. Y e t his objection to a close study of the Middle Ages was 6 8 T . H . D y e r , History of Modern Europe from the Fall of Constantinople in 1453 to the war in the Crimea in 1857 (4 vols., 1861-1864), has some criticism of Russell. H e estimated that Russell gave fully half of his space on the modern period to England alone, and gives (vol. i, pp. v i - v i i ) a list of some of his mistakes. 69

Russell, op. cit., vol. ii, pp. 205-206.

70

Ibid., vol. ii, p. 211.

RATIONALIST

HISTORY

67

based on more than a mere aversion from the spirit of medieval civilization. Russell believed that history should confine itself to periods concerning which the truth was clearly ascertainable, which in the existing state of knowledge, and for a writer of a manual, meant chiefly modern times. He felt also that the emphasis should be placed on events that had had some civil and political consequence, particularly those the effects of which continued to be felt at the time of the writer. Obviously this led naturally to an extended discussion of Europe after Westphalia at the expense of everything that had gone before, no matter how interesting or how well authenticated. Nor is such a principle for a writer of textbooks one that can easily be overthrown, even at the present day. Probably the chief difference between such a twentieth-century writer and Russell is that the latter aimed at giving, in addition to a concise account of material selected in accordance with the above principles, the lessons that might be drawn from this history. Such aims are not so plainly avowed in the present time, though it is still true that history is often meant to teach patriotism at least. In Russell's case, the lessons related in great part to the debasing influence of despotism and the evil deeds of the Tories. Indeed, he ends his discussion of political history with an attack on the treaty of 1763 as a betrayal of essential British interests by T o r y counsels. 71 In spite of this aim to teach philosophy, by the examples of history, Russell's book is mainly a straightforward narrative written in a clear, simple and interesting style. It did not expand the frontiers of learning, it was too long perhaps for its purpose, and diffuse in its treatment, but its merits attracted generations of students, until the work of Dyer gradually superseded it.72 71

Ibid., vol. v, pp. 456-460.

72

See note 68, above.

68

TRANSITION

IN ENGLISH

HISTORICAL

WRITING

Russell was also the author of a History of America ( 1 7 7 8 ) and of an unfinished History of Ancient Europe ( 1 7 9 3 ) . The first of these, published during the American Revolution, may be mentioned for having advocated that American trade should be freed from the restrictions placed upon it by the Mother Country. 73 But as a history of America it was overshadowed by Robertson and seems never to have reached a second edition. The History of Ancient Europe was carried to the Peloponnesian War when its author died. It was purely pragmatic in aim and deservedly the least successful of the three books mentioned. The breadth of Russell's interests is shown by the fact that he left manuscripts for a History and Philosophical View of the Progress of Mankind in the Knowledge of the Terraqueous Globe and for a History of England from the Beginning of the Reign of George the Third in 1760. This was to be in three volumes octavo and Cadell, the publisher, had agreed to pay £750 for the copyright. 74 73 71

History

of America

(London, 1 7 7 8 ) , vol. ii, pp. 418-419.

David Irving, Lives of Scotish [it'c] Authors; Falconer, and Russell (Edinburgh, 1 8 0 1 ) , pp. 122-123.

vis.

Fergusson,

C H A P T E R PARTY

III

H I S T O R Y FROM H U M E TO T H E TORY

1800:

EMPHASIS

PARTY history, like political parties, originated in seventeenth-century England. One is apt to think of it as inspired by a writer's desire to dish his political opponents. There may even be a suggestion that the author has sold his talents irrespective of his convictions. But party history may also derive its character solely f r o m the fact that the historian's adherence to the philosophy underlying one of the great political groups has distinctly colored his work, which has, nevertheless, been written without any crude, unscrupulous, or even conscious bias. 1 There is nothing invidious, except perhaps f r o m an ideal scientific standpoint, in ascribing a man to a succession including Hume, Hallam, Macaulay, and the elder Trevelyan. Although fields as remote as ancient Greece have been tilled in the spirit of party history, the Stuart period was naturally the chief theme of W h i g and T o r y historians in the early eighteenth century who, in a series of works of varying degrees of merit, fought over again the battles of Parliament and K i n g . 2 But with Hume's volumes on the Stuarts ( 1 7 5 4 - 1 7 5 6 ) and later on the Tudors ( 1 7 5 9 ) all such figures sank into the background. The T o r y view of English constitutional history was established so firmly that it was not overthrown finally f o r almost a hundred years. There had 1

F o r Fueter's views on party history, see op. cit., pp. 174-176.

2

On early eighteenth-century historians see A . W . Ward, in bridge History of English Literature, vol. ix, pp. 242-270. 69

Cam-

7

o

TRANSITION

IN ENGLISH

HISTORICAL

WRITING

been T o r y historians before Hume, but no one who with such genius and insight seemed to argue f r o m the historical situation of the seventeenth century to a reading of the past that happened to fit in with T o r y philosophy. He maintained that the privileges of Parliament were not " exactly ascertained " nor the royal power " fully limited " when James i came to the throne. 3 T h e exact nature of the constitution was in doubt, and since the Tudors had exercised a despotism the early Stuarts might pardonably suppose that their own rights were greater than the Parliament would allow. H e was not willing to admit that precedents were all on the popular side, nor that the popular leaders were paragons of virtue, their actions unsullied by hypocrisy and self-interest. T h e gist of his position is well given in a letter he wrote to the radical historian, Mrs. M a c a u l a y : 4 For as I look upon all kinds of subdivision of power, from the monarchy of France to the freest democracy of some Swiss cantons, to be equally legal, if established by custom and authority; I cannot but think, that the mixed monarchy of England, such as it was left by Queen Elizabeth, was a lawful form of government, and carried obligations, to obedience and allegiance; at least it must be acknowledged, that the princes and ministers who supported that form, tho' somewhat arbitrarily, could not incur much blame on that account; and that there is more reason to make an apology for their antagonists than for them. I grant that the cause of liberty, which you, Madam, with the Pyms and Hampdens have adopted, is noble and generous; but most of the partizans of that cause, in the last century, disgraced it, by their violence, and also by their cant, hypocrisy, and bigotry, which, more than the principles of civil liberty, seem to have been the motive of all their actions. 3

D. Hume, The History of England from the Invasion of Julius Caesar to the Revolution in 1688 (new edition, London, 1802), vol. vi, p. 18. See also supra, pp. 20-21. 4

European Magazine, vol. iv (London, Nov., 1783), p. 331. Mrs. Macaulay, dated March 29, 1764.

Letter to

PARTY

HISTORY

TO

1800

71

Hume was less inclined to palliate the later than the early Stuarts because he thought that through the stern agency of war and revolution the constitution was becoming more determined, the limits of royal action more clear. James I I , he said, lacked " a due regard and affection to the religion and constitution of his country." 5 A n d he believed that the Revolution of 1688 " has put the nature of the English constitution beyond all controversy." 8 Hume was no mere reactionary; he could not stomach Hobbes' political philosophy, 7 and he justified resistance to authority in cases of great oppression. 8 But in a day when the Whigs were posing as the saviors of the constitution, and the Stuarts were sometimes pictured as legendary monsters of illegal tyranny, he undertook to give a realistic, philosophical view of the seventeenth century. There was, it is true, more than concern for historical accuracy in his attitude. He disliked the Puritans f o r their fanaticism in religion and their regimentation of conduct, and this was partly responsible f o r his views of politics. Moreover he was annoyed at the English because he thought they did not appreciate the first volume of his history on its appearance, he attached this pique to the Whigs, and admittedly went ahead to eliminate everything in their f a v o r from his later volumes and later editions. 9 But this cannot alter the profound service he rendered to the historical interpretation of the seventeenth century. Fundamentally, his position rested upon a philosophical reading of a given historical 5

History

6

Ibid., vol. viii, p. 320.

of England,

vol. viii, p. 306.

7

" Hobbes' politics are fitted only to promote tyranny, and his ethics to encourage licentiousness." Ibid., vol. vii, p. 346. 8 There is a good summary of Hume's political philosophy in its relationship to his History in Black, op. cit., pp. 108-114. 9

J. H. Burton, op. cit., vol. ii, pp. 73-78, 433-434-

y2

TRANSITION

IN ENGLISH

HISTORICAL

WRITING

situation, not upon a selection of facts to serve the ends of a party. 10 Following Hume, further discredit was cast upon the Whigs by Sir John Dalrymple and James Macpherson. Between 1 7 7 1 and 1788 Dalrymple published three large volumes of Memoirs of Great Britain and Ireland for the period of 1681 to 1692. 1 1 " His first volume caused much stir; for it revealed the extent to which English politics, in the reign of Charles II, had been influenced by French intrigues, and disgusted the Whigs by exhibiting Sidney's acceptance of money from Barillon." 1 2 The volume issued in 1 7 7 3 was also extremely important because of the large mass of hitherto unpublished documents contained, and the whole work still has some value for this reason. 13 From the standpoint of party history his works were all the more influential for these documents and because Dalrymple professed great distress at the reflections upon the integrity of Revolutionary leaders contained in them. He continued however to make a hero out of William I I I . " 10 In addition to Black, see M. S. Kuypers, Studies in the Eighteenth Century Background of Hume's Empiricism (Minneapolis, 1930), pp. 123-128. 11 Memoirs of Great Britain aiul Ireland, From the Dissolution of the last Parliament of Charles II until the Sea-Battle off La Hogue ( 1 volume in 2 parts, Edinburgh and London, 1 7 7 1 - 1 7 7 3 ) . Memoirs of Great Britain and Ireland, from the battle off La Hogue till the capture of the French and Spanish fleets at Vigo (Edinburgh and London, 1788). 12

William Hunt in Cambridge History of English Literature, vol. x , p. 290. F o r references to criticisms of the Memoirs see ibid., vol. x, p. 500. 1S G . Davies, Bibliography of British History, Stuart Period ( O x f o r d , 1928), p. 1 1 : " A valuable collection: the first ed. is the best." 11

" W h e n I found in the French dispatches lord Russell intriguing with the court of Versailles, and Algernon Sidney taking money from it, I felt very near the same shock as if I had seen a son turn his back in the day of battle." Memoirs, vol. i, pt. ii, p. vii. He declared that if William I I I had lived a few years longer he would probably have gained all the glories of Marlborough " and passed to posterity as the greatest

PARTY

HISTORY

TO

1800

73

It was the use of historical study in teaching politics rather than in uncovering new materials in which Dalrymple was mainly interested. " It is said by some, that History ought to relate events, but not to make observations upon them, because Thucydides followed in some degree that rule, and Lucian prescribes it. . . . But Polybius, Tacitus, Davila, thought otherwise. To me it appears, that, to write history without drawing moral or political rules of conduct from it, is little better than writing a romance." 15 He stated that he was led to publish the continuation of his Memoirs, from La Hogue to Vigo, by the threat of a new continental and naval war. He wished to warn the public of the dangers of this, and if war did come to indicate certain of the weaknesses in the Spanish and French monarchies. 16 But though thus wholeheartedly pragmatic in his viewpoint, and pragmatic in the narrower sense of applying history to specific situations, Dalrymple's experience and intelligence were such that his comments sound sensible and plausible. He was not a good stylist and he has sometimes been criticised for annalistic tendencies and a love of gossip 17 but he was not incapable of large views as appears from his interesting discussion of the possible future of the United States of America and his recognition of the importance of trade in determining the history of modern nations. After having enriched the world with the lofty verse of Ossian and the rabid theorizing of his Introduction to the general and politician that ever lived," because of the collapse of Louis X I V ' s fortunes then, the decline of the French army (through death of I.ouvois, etc.), the decay of French alliances and the old age of Louis himself. Ibid., vol. ii, pp. 185-187; c f . pp. I/3-I7515

Ibid., vol. ii, p. 177.

16

Ibid.,

17

vol. ii, pp. v-vii.

Hallam called him "that retailer of all gossip," Constitutional tory of England (London, 1846), vol. ii, p. 304, note.

His-

74

TRANSITION

IN ENGLISH

HISTORICAL

WRITING

History of Great Britain and IrelandMacpherson's pen was free for the service of the highest bidder. The booksellers wanted someone to continue the work of Hume beyond the Revolution and wavered between Macpherson and Sir John Dalrymple, both being acceptable as likely to take a Tory position. Hume was not keen about either, going so far as to declare Macpherson to have " the most anti-historical head in the universe," 19 but the latter was given the assignment anyway. In 1775 he produced two works, one of them a history of Great Britain from 1660 to 1 7 1 4 and the other a collection of documents, in two quarto volumes, covering the same period.20 The second was the more important of the two, for it contained extracts from a biography of James II, based on notes made by himself, as well as Jacobite correspondence.21 The documents were sensational in that they proved that there had been a secret correspondence between Whig leaders and James II after the Revolution of 1688, a fact over which the Tories gloated and the Whigs drooped. 18 18

See infra, pp. m - 1 1 3 .

T . B . Saunders, James Macpherson with quotations from Hume's letters.

(London, 1894), pp. 223-225,

20

The History of Great Britain, from the Restoration, to the Accession of the House of Hanover (2 volumes, London, 1775). Original Papers; containing the secret history of Great Britain, from the restoration, to the accession of the House of Hanover. To which are prefixed extracts from the life of James II, as written by himself. The whole arranged and published by James Macpherson, Esquire, in two volumes (London, 1775). 21 Ranke discussed the L i f e of James in his History of England (Oxford, 1875), vol. vi, pp. 29-45. He accepts its authenticity, but points out that the extracts were not as carefully made as might be desired. Godfrey Davies, op. cit., p. 1 1 , gives references for the discussion of the authenticity of Macpherson's Original Papers. The only point that concerns us is that Macpherson used the papers in good faith and put them on display at his publishers. There was no disguise, no evasion, as in the case of the supposed originals of Ossian.

PARTY

HISTORY

TO 1800

75

One might expect Macpherson who was so important in the rise of Romanticism, to envisage the history of the later seventeenth century in a different way from his predecessors, but such was not the case. He gives us a narrative of political events and court intrigues, and while he expresses his desire to emphasize the schemes of the cabinet rather than the operations of the field, he never seems to realize that more than both of these is necessary to a satisfactory understanding even of political history. But within the limits of his conception of history, and of his prejudices, he worked well. He used not only the original papers already mentioned, but also the records and journals of Parliament, and contemporary writers. Desiring to stress what was little known, or so important that it needed retelling, he was most detailed on the intrigues immediately preceding the Revolution, the circumstances o f the Revolution itself, the negotiations between James in exile and political leaders in England, the last years of Queen Anne, and such topics. 22 The History cannot be dismissed as merely a piece of special pleading. Macpherson argued without violence, and sometimes even without rhetoric, now showing the Tories guilty of inconsistency, now pointing out that both parties used every kind of measure to annoy each other from selfish motives, or that both were chiefly interested in securing power. 23 H e strives to give and to a large extent succeeds in giving the impression of balanced judgment and careful following of the evidence of the sources. In delineation of character, he appears to have followed a definite plan of set22 For a discussion of sources and aims, see the History, Preface, vol. i, p. iii ct seq. He there expresses the understanding and ideals of history conventional among the rationalists of the day. 23

Ibid., vol. ii, pp. 290, 332, 339, 463-464. Hallam correctly remarks (Constitutional History of England, vol. ii, p. 71, note) that Macpherson's History is " a work by no means so full of a Tory spirit as has been supposed."

76

TRANSITION

IN ENGLISH

HISTORICAL

WRITING

ting down the good and bad points in nearly equal proportion. But whatever his intention, he leaned towards severity in his judgment on public men, especially on their intellects and capacities for affairs. There were none of whom he approved highly; at the best his portraits have a gray tone." The core of the History is of course the interpretation of the Revolution itself. James II is portrayed as more unfortunate than blameworthy, his religious enthusiasm a kind of madness that cost him his throne. While too arbitrary in his political principles, he was nevertheless not without great virtues both as man and as monarch. He was frugal with the public money, encouraged commerce, improved the naval position of England, and remained always attentive to her interests in foreign affairs. With an " almost irreproachable " private character, he combined a true love of his people. It is true that he attempted to rule in an arbitrary way, but if, Macpherson suggested, the army officers instead of deserting to William had declared for James, subject to his promise to call and continue a free Parliament, popular liberties might have been secured without a change in the succession and even more securely than by the Revolution which had assigned to the new king more powers than need have been left to James. Yet once this opportunity to preserve a chastened Stuart was gone, and James fled to France, political necessity dictated that William be made king since without this reward he might have refused to defend England against a possible invasion by Louis X I V . " Upon this obvious ground of necessity the convention ought to have proceeded, 24 See: on Clarendon, History, vol. i, p. 98; Charles I I , ibid., vol. i, pp. 3, 4 2 3 ; Buckingham, ibid., vol. i, p. 1 3 2 ; William I I I , ibid., vol. ii, pp. 223-226; Marlborough, ibid., vol. ii, pp. 5 1 4 - 5 1 8 ; the Duke of Albemarle, ibid., vol. i, p. 120. S i r Thomas Osborne " o w e d more to fortune than either to his own virtues or his abilities," ibid., vol. i, p. 185. Monmouth was " vain to a degree of folly, versatile in his measures, weak in his understanding," ibid., vol. i, p. 179.

PARTY

HISTORY

TO 1800

77

and to leave puerile quibbles about words to the idle declamation of the schools." 25 Having proved the Revolution unnecessary, Macpherson went on to argue that it had defeated its own purpose. The Crown had gained as much in the influence derived from the control of enormous revenues as it lost through the limitation placed upon the prerogative and the establishment of Parliamentary control of succession. " Power had ceased to be splendid; but it became permanent and irresistible; and mankind may be imperceptibly surrounded with the toils of despotism, while they have the vanity to think themselves free." 28 If Tobias Smollett finds a place among the early successors of Hume it is only because of the familiarity of his name and the long-standing use of his book. His Compleat History of England ( 1 7 5 7 - 1 7 5 8 ) was merely a rapid compilation written as a commercial venture to rival Hume. But since, with a Continuation ( 1 7 6 3 - 1 7 6 5 ) , it carried a Tory interpretation beyond 1688 into the eighteenth century, it was long used as a supplement to Hume." Still less of an historian was Oliver Goldsmith. His volumes 28 were in25

Ibid., vol. i, p. 574.

28

Ibid., vol. ii, p. 202.

Cf. vol. i, pp. 350, 570-574-

27 T. G. Smollett, A Compleat History of England deduced from the descent of Julius Caesar to the Treaty of Aix la Chapelle (London, 1748) ; Continuation of the Complete History of England (London, 17613-65). Smollett was linked with Hume through his The History of England from the Revolution to the death of George II (Designed as a continuation of Mr. Hume's History), (new edition, London, 1789). 28 O. Goldsmith, The Roman History, from the foundation of the City of Rome to the destruction of the Western Empire (London, 1769) ; The History of England, from the earliest times to the death of George II (London, 1771) ; The Grecian History, from the earliest state to the death of Alexander the Great (London, 1774). Goldsmith published anonymously A History of England in a Series of Letters from a Nobleman to his son (London, 1764).

78

TRANSITION

IN ENGLISH

HISTORICAL

WRITING

tended as compressed accounts for children. They were undistinguished except for style. William Harris was the author of lives of James I ( 1 7 5 3 ) , Charles I ( 1 7 5 8 ) , Oliver Cromwell ( 1 7 6 2 ) , and Charles I I ( 1 7 6 6 ) . They are well known because of the useful material contained in their footnotes, but only for that reason.29 Mark Noble's Memoirs of the Protectoral House of Cromwell ( 1 7 8 4 ) and Lives of the English Regicides ( 1 7 9 8 ) were badly executed, but they too comprised much information. The former, much used and abused by Carlyle, is said to have laid the foundation of Cromwellian Studies.30 In 1806 Noble brought out a continuation, from 1688 to 1727, of James Granger's Biographical History of England. A f t e r the accession of George I I I there began to appear a new group of party historians, in whom can be found the influence of such events as George I l l ' s attempt at personal government, the American Revolution, the French Revolution, and the Napoleonic Wars, They labored in the shadow of world-shaking events and generally in fear of a social upheaval by which they themselves might be destroyed. The old issues between Whigs and Tories, both of whom accepted the established order in its main outlines, were still live ones; but they were complicated by questions concerning the very basis of society and the state, questions of democracy and republicanism. At the same time there may be seen developing in some of these writers a certain nationalism which must profoundly alter the character of party history. Whigs and Tories, who had quarreled about their own Revolution, so quiet in its character and so careful of the rights of property, were inclined to stand side by side against a foreign Revolution that seemed to them subversive both of property and 29 Godfrey Davies, op. cit., p. 89. published in five volumes in 1814. 30

A new edition of Harris' Lives

W. C. Abbott, Conflicts with Oblivion

was

( N e w Haven, 1924), p. :8o.

PARTY

HISTORY

TO 1800

79

r e l i g i o n a n d that led t o a r e n e w a l o f w a r w i t h the ancient national enemy. M r s . C a t h a r i n e M a c a u l a y h a s been called one o f the ablest o f the new r e v o l u t i o n a r y school called f o r t h b y these events. H e r History the Revolution

of England,

from

(1763-1783)

the Accession

31

erable income t o its compiler.

H o r a c e W a l p o l e regarded it

as the best e x t a n t h i s t o r y o f E n g l a n d . 3 2 a u t h o r made s o m e use o f

of James I to

b r o u g h t f a m e a n d a considIt is true that t h e

the manuscripts at the

M u s e u m , but she w a s not a scholar.

British

N o r did she reveal

m u c h conception o f the historical outlook.

She made no

a l l o w a n c e s f o r c i r c u m s t a n c e s a n d seldom s a w that the c h a r a c t e r s o f h i s t o r y w e r e h u m a n beings, m i n g l i n g g o o d a n d evil, not embodied v i r t u e s or vices.

S h e belonged to the

" hero-villain " school in w h i c h e v e r y o n e is w h o l l y g o o d o r v e r y bad a n d events a r e t o be attributed t o the p r a i s e w o r t h y or b l a m e w o r t h y acts o f individuals.

S h e protested a g a i n s t

the tendency to h u m a n i z e the heroes o f h i s t o r y b y e x h i b i t i o n o f their faults a l o n g w i t h their virtues, f o r " w h a t patterns shall w e select f o r the m o d e l o f y o u t h f u l emulation, if w e a d m i t o f m o d e r n scepticism in r e g a r d to the reality o f that v i r t u e w h i c h w e h a v e l o n g adored in the sacred m e m o r i e s o f our f o r e f a t h e r s ? " Privately

educated

38

under

her

father's

direction,

Mrs.

M a c a u l a y had early imbibed an intense love of liberty, especially a s embodied in the republican heroes o f ancient R o m e and

seventeenth-century

England.

Her

History

was

a

31 This is the title in its final form. Mrs. Macaulay had intended to carry her History beyond 1688, but never did so. In 1778, however, she issued volume i of a History of England, from the Revolution to the present time, in a series of letters . . . , but this was never continued further.

32 D. N. B., art. " Mrs. Catharine Macaulay." 33 Op. cii., vol. vii, p. 495. On the whole, however, the latter volumes are milder in tone, probably as the result of the strong criticism which the preface to volume vi shows that Mrs. Macaulay felt keenly.

80

TRANSITION

IN ENGLISH

HISTORICAL

WRITING

political manifesto. It was prefaced by Thomson's " Ode to Liberty " and was itself a very unpoetical ode to the same noble cause. Her introductory survey showed liberty brought with the Anglo-Saxons from the German woods, but stricken by the Norman Conquest. There followed a slow revival in the increasing opposition to papal tyranny until the Reformation which by uniting political and ecclesiastical authority in the same person had once again fettered the people. F r o m Henry V I I I the nation " has preserved a steady course towards slavery and public ruin," 34 except for the interlude of the Commonwealth. The opponents of Charles I were " the greatest men England ever produced " 33 and " in the annals of recorded time never had Fortune reared so tall a monument of human virtue " 36 as the achievements of the L o n g Parliament. The Commonwealth was " the brightest age that ever adorned the page of history." 37 The Independents were the heroes of Mrs. Macaulay's story, the Commonwealth its Golden A g e , but Cromwell rather than the Stuarts its worst villain. He was, wrote Mrs. Macaulay in her restrained fashion, the cause of more evil than any other character in history. 38 Even the Revolution of 1688 she 34

Ibid., vol. vii, p. 332.

35

Ibid., vol. ii, p. 64.

36

Ibid., vol. v, p. 94.

Cf. vol. ii, p. 1 ; vol. v, p. 178.

Ibid., vol. v, p. 382. " T h e administration of government, in all its departments, w a s perfectly just and impartial." Ibid., vol. v, p. 99. 37

38 Ibid., vol. v, pp. 213-214. C f . vol. v, pp. 123-124, where she calls him " a character more diabolically wicked than it was possible f o r the generality of the honest part of mankind to conceive." Mrs. Macaulay devoted almost a whole volume to contrasting the good government of the Commonwealth with the v e r y bad government of Cromwell. Prof. W . C. A b b o t t r e f e r s to this portrait of Cromwell as " compounded . . . of the worst of H e a t h and Leti, Holies and Ludlow, heightened by her o w n considerable g i f t of invective," and remarks that, beside Mrs. Macaulay, H u m e is a dispassionate Thucydides. " T h e Fame of Cromwell " in Conflicts with Obliinon ( N e w Haven, 1924), p. 181.

PARTY

HISTORY

TO

1800

8l

regarded as merely a settlement of the C r o w n rather than a step towards liberty. 39 It had inaugurated a political system with the combined vices of " all the monarchical, oligarchical, and aristocratical tyrannies in the world." 40 Mrs. Macaulay ended her History with ten sizzling quarto pages on the steady decline of Great Britain since 1688, exempting only the Earl of Chatham from her invective. Factions had increased, patriotism had been destroyed, lip service alone was paid to the sacred principle of toleration, while everywhere rotten boroughs, open elections, corruption and decay in many forms gnawed at the foundations of state and society. 41 It is obvious that Mrs. Macaulay had few of the qualifications of the historian. She does not strike us as being even a good controversialist since she did not know when to be moderate and when extreme. She was like a baseball pitcher with only one curve and no change of pace. Her extravagance of expression was remarkable even for her own day. Still there were many to whom this sort of history appealed strongly. A t any rate, Mrs. Macaulay's book was widely praised, if not widely read, and was translated into French. Even Hume treated it respectfully enough in the letters in which he explained his disagreement with its author.'12 Mrs. Macaulay corresponded with Washington and once spent ten days at Mount Vernon. W h e n she visited Paris, intellectual circles acclaimed her, while Mme. Roland was inspired by her writings with the ambition to become " la Macaulay de son pays." T o her influence, largely, has been attributed the unfavorable impression of 39

Op.

40

Ibid.,

vol. i, pp. x v i - x v i i ; v o l . vi, p. 90; v o l . viii, p. 330.

41

Ibid.,

vol. vi, pp. 89-90, 192, 2 1 1 ; v o l . vii, pp. 152-153, 4 9 6 ; v o l . viii,

cit., v o l . v i i i , pp. 329-330.

PP- 329-339*2 European

Magasinc,

v o l . iv ( N o v . , 1 7 8 3 ) , pp. 331-332.

82

TRANSITION

IN ENGLISH

HISTORICAL

WRITING

the English Government current among some Frenchmen during the latter part of the century. 4 ' John Millar's Historical View of the English Government ( 1 7 8 7 - 1 8 0 3 ) first appeared in two volumes ending at the accession of the Stuarts. T o a later posthumous edition were added a rather cursory sketch of the seventeenth century and a volume of essays, perhaps only the raw material intended to be worked up into a full discussion, on diverse subjects connected with the English constitution after the Revolution of 1688. 44 Dedicated to Fox, and consistently Whiggish in tone, the book is another answer to Hume's interpretation of English history. Millar maintains the Whig thesis that England had long had a limited monarchy and a constitution whose essential forms existed in the thirteenth century at least. Anxiety to demonstrate that England's government in the middle ages was not an arbitrary one is reflected throughout, while the section on Elizabeth's reign is almost wholly given up to refuting Hume's famous remark that the government of sixteenth-century England might justly be compared, at least in some of its aspects, to that of eighteenth-century Turkey. 45 Nor does Millar make any secret of his prepossession for the Parliamentary cause in the seventeenth century or his general liberalism in attitude towards his own time. 43 " F r e n c h Eighteenth Century Opinion of the E n g l i s h Constitution," unpublished paper by M r . D a v i d Williams, Lecturer in History at A b e r y s t with College, University of W a l e s . 41 An Historical View of the English Government, from the settlement of the Saxons in Britain to the accession of the House of Stuart (London, 1 7 8 7 ) . An Historical View of the English Government from the settlement of the Saxons in Britain to the Revolution in 1688... To which are subjoined, some dissertations connected with the history of the goi'crnment, from the revolution to the present times (4 volumes, London, 1 8 0 3 ) . Of this, volumes iii and iv are the continuation of the first edition. S e e also supra, pp. 1 7 - 1 8 . 45

D . H u m e , History

of England,

vol. v, pp. 459-460.

PARTY

HISTORY

TO 1800

83

Millar gave no evidence of a prolonged search of the sources which he seldom cites or cites incompletely. He was apt to theorize without much reference to detailed facts. 4 9 But he was a pioneer in the study of constitutional history, he recognized the necessity of adequate treatment of the earlier history of the government, and he was very conscious that the constitution of his own day was the product of a long, slow development. He showed a surprising awareness of the interaction of economic, social and political history. H e traced the rise of free government in Europe to the development of commerce and industry which freed men f r o m dependence upon the great landlords on whose manors they had formerly worked. T h e merchant, he pointed out, serves the public as a whole and if energetic he will succeed. Freed from the close supervision of one master and stimulated to self-reliance by his own exertions, he develops political notions of a liberal or even democratic tendency. A t the same time, with the rise of commerce and industry, the legislator or governor is forced to take cognizance of their needs in his conduct of affairs. He " must accomodate his regulations to the progressive changes in the condition of the people f o r whom they are intended, to the progress in manufactures and commerce, their increase in opulence, and their advances in luxury and refinement." " It was no accident that led Millar to describe the period after 1 6 0 3 as the " Commercial Government of England." A t the same time, he did not adopt a deterministic view of the effect of economic forces. Accident and great leaders played their part. T h e actions of government might stimulate or restrain the economic development of a country, while the results of similar economic forces might be different in 48 Hallam criticized him on these grounds, View of the State of in the Middle Ages (7th edition, London, 1837), vol. i, p. xi. 47

Historical

View, vol. iv, p. 78.

Europe

84

TRANSITION

IN ENGLISH

HISTORICAL

WRITING

different countries according as other factors changed. The independence and wealth acquired by the commercial classes in England tended to produce popular government, but on the Continent this wealth was used to buy mercenary armies which enhanced the power of the Crown. In every country v/here there was a progress in manufacturing and the arts a struggle between king and people' was inevitable at some stage, but " the success of either party has frequently depended upon peculiar and accidental circumstances." 48 Few writers showed a keener realization of the complexity of historical processes, than is revealed in this book and the earlier Origin of the Distinction of Ranks. The standard histories of Greece during this period were those by William Mitford and John Gillies and both may well be regarded as party histories. Mitford's History was published in five quarto volumes between 1784 and 1810. The author was already forty years old in 1784, and his opinions well formed. A High Tory in politics, he did not write until the revolutionary wave that was to swallow up eighteenth-century society had already begun, and to a large extent his panic hatred of revolutionary ideas inspired his work. A s a young man at Oxford he showed no great scholarly interests except for his deep love of Greek, the study of which occupied him after he had retired from law to the family estate at Exbury. In 1776 lie went abroad where French scholars encouraged his classical pursuits and where the principles that preceded the events of 1789 already shocked his Tory mind. His friend and fellow militia officer, Gibbon, suggested that he write a History of Greece and he determined to use this history not only to correct the unsound (to him at least) eulogizing of Greek political life, but also to refute the principles of the American, and later of the French Revolutions, to defend the British ConstituIbid., vol. iii, p. 118.

PARTY

HISTORY

TO 1800

85

t i o n f r o m attack, a n d t o lay d o w n the true principles o f g o v ernment. 4 9

G r e e k h i s t o r y m a y seem an a m a z i n g vehicle f o r

such teachings, but later and g r e a t e r men h a v e also employed ancient c i v i l i z a t i o n a s a n o b j e c t lesson f o r their o w n contemporaries.

I t is i m p o r t a n t t o remember the t w o strains

in M i t f o r d ' s History;

o n the one hand it is a political polemic

w h i l e on t h e other it is the result o f l o n g continued interest in classical studies l e a d i n g its a u t h o r to the attempt t o w r i t e a n e w a n d d i f f e r e n t h i s t o r y o f Greece, one that should be based directly o n the sources themselves. M i t f o r d believed w i t h the a g e in w h i c h he lived that hist o r y , especially G r e e k h i s t o r y , " should be a political institute f o r all n a t i o n s , "

50

but that no w r i t e r had hitherto dealt

w i t h it in a m a n n e r — f r e e f r o m p a n e g y r i c a n d contradictions, w r i t t e n f r o m t h e best available m a t e r i a l — s o that its political lessons could be m a d e plain. 5 1

H i s p r a g m a t i c pur-

pose, and e v e n the c o u n t e r - r e v o l u t i o n a r y passion, did not h o w e v e r altogether d e s t r o y his scholarly instincts. w a s a distinct a d v a n c e over its predecessors.

H i s book But unfor-

tunately f o r his ultimate r e n o w n , especially in an era d o m i nated by W h i g ideas, M i t f o r d ' s political p r e j u d i c e s m o r e apparent than his services to scholarship. 5 2

were

I f he had

been more adept or less excited by events in F r a n c e he m i g h t 4 9 Mitford's brother, Lord Redesdale, wrote a short account of the historian which appears as a preface to volume i of the edition of 1838 (pp. ix-xliv). Lord Redesdale gave as the three motives of the work: a desire to offset the misinterpretation of the British Constitution by the American and French revolutionaries; a desire to refute revolutionary doctrines in general; and a desire to correct the unwarranted eulogizing of Greek political life. See especially pp. xvii-xviii and xl-xli. 50

History

51

of Greece (London, 1784-1818), vol. ii, pp. 674-675.

Ibid., vol. ii, p. 12; vol. iii, pp. 83-84.

5 2 Perhaps his greatest service was the stimulation to Grote to compose his own History of which he said: " My purpose in writing it was to rectify the erroneous statements as to matter of fact which [Mitford's] History contained, as well as to consider the general phenomena of the

86

TRANSITION

IN ENGLISH

HISTORICAL

WRITING

have made his History a more successful " political institute " than was actually the case. E v e n the Whigs read Hume f o r a long, long time, but M i t f o r d was less clever. He gave his readers in a bold, clear-cut way, sundry ideas about the ideal f o r m of government, illustrating those by reference to Greek institutions and events, by definite comments on the British Constitution, and by attacks on French Revolutionaries. He did gain a temporary influence, but only to give way to almost total oblivion." W e need not detail M i t f o r d ' s ideas on the proper form of government. H i s opposition to democracy was irreconcilable. Sometimes he sank to the level of mere vituperation, not only of the specific " democracy " of Athens, but of democracy as a f o r m of government in general. T o Mitford, as to most eighteenth-century persons, the word " democracy " seems to have meant only the worst demagogy of the ancient world, or perhaps we should say the acts of governments like that of fourth-century Athens, which have come down to us in the guise of demagogy. 54 H e stressed the " indelible barbarism," the " licentiousness " of democracy, pronouncing it an irresponsible form of government because in it all are responsible. Only despotism can equal its corruption, while of all government it gives most opportunity to the lawless adventurer to make himself master of Grecian world under what I thought a juster and more comprehensive point of view." History of Greece (New York, 1854), vol. i, Preface, p. iii. G. P. Gooch, History and Historians in the Nineteenth Century (3rd impression, London, 1920), p. 312. Clinton was also led to the Greek historians by reading Mitford. Ibid., p. 309. 53

Macaulay thought that Mitford had made partiality for an oligarchical form of government " in some degree popular." " On Mitford's History of Greece," Critical, Historical and Miscellaneous Essays (New York, i860), vol. i, p. 181. 04

Kingsley Martin, French Liberal Thought in the Eighteenth (London, 1929), p. 188, note.

Century

PARTY

HISTORY

TO 1800

87

the state. Careless of individual s a f e t y a n d liberty, oppressive of subject peoples yet eager f o r imperial rule, " it is in the n a t u r e of democracy to be both tyrannical a n d a m b i t i o u s . " 55 Macaulay has accused M i t f o r d of p r e f e r r i n g oligarchy above all other f o r m s of government, b u t while it m a y be true that M i t f o r d favored Greek oligarchies at the expense of " democratic " Athens, it is also true t h a t his first p r e f e r ence was f o r monarchical Macedon, and he specifically repudiated oligarchy in f a v o r of the conventional " m i x e d " f o r m of government. T h i s is clear f r o m his c o m m e n t on the statement : " T h a t is really the best g o v e r n m e n t which is so constituted, in whatever f o r m , as most t o ensure a j u s t administration." Mitford says:56 But this cannot be absolute monarchy; for there all must depend upon the accidental character of the reigning prince: it cannot be democracy; for there the popular passion, which interested demagogues may in the moment excite, or the exertion, not even of the most numerous, but of the most turbulent and least scrupulous party, will decide everything: it cannot be oligarchy, or what is vulgarly called aristocracy; for there a part of the people has an interest separate from the rest; it can only be a government so mixed and balanced that it may have the strength to restrain popular folly and popular injustice, without being strong enough to support its own injustice and folly. W i t h such views M i t f o r d could find little to commend in A t h e n i a n political history. It is true that he regarded Solon as a great and good statesman, his constitution " perhaps the 55

Op. ext., vol. i, p. 228; vol. ii, pp. 178. 30s, 346, 421, 429, 532, 597; vol. iii, pp. 14, 52-68, 83, 375, 440, 448; vol. iv, pp. 50, 145, 194, 230-236, 249, 298, 453, 604. It is perhaps significant that all but one of these references come from the volumes written after the outbreak of the French Revolution, and the majority from the period after the outbreak of w a r and the Terror. 06

Ibid., vol. iii, p. 38, note 20.

C f . vol. iii, pp. 271-272.

88

TRANSITION

IN ENGLISH

HISTORICAL

WRITING

most perfect that can consist with democracy " ; " but even Solon had been unable to stem the downward trend of the Athenian government, which, with the reduction of the power of the Areopagus in the fifth century, and the union of legislative, executive, financial, and judicial powers in the same hands, took on the character of a true despotism under the form of democracy. 58 Consequently, Mitford gave a sympathetic picture of the oligarchical revolution against the democratic government of Athens. 59 Yet he found the true salvation for Greece not in oligarchy, but in the strong arm and the mailed fist. No individuals received more consistent praise at his hands than Philip of Macedon and Dionysius the Elder of Syracuse, while Demosthenes was pictured as if a dishonest small-town politician. He called the Macedonian constitution superior to that of any other Greek state known to modern historians and declared that the best prospect of Greece becoming " a united and happy nation " was, " after the early age of Agamemnon," under Philip of Macedon. 60 Macaulay furthermore accused Mitford of preferring the Persians, the Carthaginians, and all other " barbarian" peoples to the Greeks, but such a judgment needs some qualification.81 Mitford refused to join in the fulsome panegyric of the ancients so popular in his day, and was undoubtedly guilty of extreme exaggeration, not to say questionable historical method, in his attack on Greek democracy. But his objection was to institutions, not to the people. " Had « Ibid., vol. i, p. 268. 58

Ibid., vol. i, pp. 252-253, 268; vol. ii, p. 88.

59

Ibid., vol. ii, pp. 580-589, 612. On the other hand he praises Thucydides for not exhibiting partiality for oligarchy. 80

For Philip of Macedon, ibid., vol. iv, pp. 412-634; vol. v, p. 34. For Dionysius, ibid., vol. iv, pp. 3 1 - 1 3 1 , esp. pp. 106, 109, 112, 115, 128, 130-131. 61

Macaulay, op. cit., p. 196.

PARTY

HISTORY

TO 1800

89

Athens had a government so constituted as to be capable of a wise and steady administration, men were not wanting, qualified by abilities and information, to direct the business of an empire." 62 H e recognized the preeminence of Athens in the fields of art, science, " fine taste and politeness," which had made her mistress of the world through all succeeding ages, " though so f e w in numbers and so troubled in her politics." 63 H e commented sympathetically on Athenian a f f a i r s after the Sicilian disaster 84 and declared that by their success against the Carthaginians the Sicilian Greeks had " earned a glory which we want means justly to estimate." 85 M i t f o r d ' s sympathies were not wide enough to encompass the ancient Athenian government, especially as he viewed it against the lurid background of Jacobin France, but neither was the youthful Macaulay, inspired by the fermenting W h i g g i s m of 1 8 2 4 , always a f a i r critic of the despised T o r y historian. M i t f o r d was unabashed in his idealisation of the English government of his day, " the most perfect that has yet existed upon earth," 86 and one combining all the virtues and avoiding all the dangers of Monarchy, Aristocracy, and Democracy. H e was careful to point out, however, that the English had always been free, since the A n g l o - S a x o n s had come over to Britain f r o m the woods of Germany, bringing with them those institutions which steadily improved upon, especially at the hands of great monarchs like A l f r e d , Henry I I and E d w a r d I, had reached their perfection under George III. 6 7 He pointed out also that this constitution, so nicely 82

History

63

Ibid., vol. ii, p. 117.

of Greece, vol. ii, p. 109.

64

Ibid., vol. ii, pp. 544-546.

65

Ibid., vol. ii, p. 19.

80

Ibid., vol. i, p. 176.

87

Ibid., vol. i, p. 251; vol. ii, p. 672 and note 2; vol. v, pp. 32-33, 324.

go

TRANSITION

IN ENGLISH

HISTORICAL

WRITING

combining the virtues of all simple f o r m s of government, rested upon an equally well balanced hierarchical social system in which no one class w a s sufficiently predominant to oppress the others; and took occasion to r e f e r such happy perfection in political and social arrangements to the study and imitation of less fortunate peoples. 68 Incensed patriotism combined with terrified conservatism would not permit M i t f o r d to omit the French Revolution f r o m Greek history.

Sometimes this is shown in a m u s i n g

interludes like his protests against the use o f French phrases in English newspapers and the English military vocabulary. There m a y have been some weight in his accusation of linguistic nationalism on the part o f the French, but probably f e w o f his non-English readers would be convinced by his complaints at the excessive modesty of his o w n people. 69

Such

points would not seem of great importance, did we not k n o w that it is precisely this sort of thing that appears frequently when nationalism is emerging a m o n g a people.

But it w a s

the French as " democrats " and revolutionaries, rather than the French as national enemies, w h o annoyed M i t f o r d most. T h e i r philosophers, lacking originality in everything else, had excelled only in atrocities, even to the extent o f j u s t i f y i n g assassination as a political weapon.

T h e worst actions o f

the Greek republic had never been equaled, said M i t f o r d , until the French Revolution, to which he turns for an analogy of some particularly base deed in Greek history, thus d r i v i n g home his lessons in application both to ancient and to modern times. 70 It is evident that this history of Greece belongs to the 68 Ibid., vol. ii, pp. 670-675; vol. iii, pp. 36, 332; vol. iv, pp. 192-194; vol. v, pp. 30-35. 69

Ibid., vol. v, p. 418, note 18.

Ibid., vol. iii, p. 38, note 20, p. 441, note 7, pp. 445, 446, 507, note 45 ; vol. iv, pp. 190, 500, note 4. 70

PARTY

HISTORY

TO

1800

91

reaction against the r e f o r m and revolutionary movements of the eighteenth century. Moreover M i t f o r d has been criticized f o r other defects than political partiality. Among these are his love of singularity in style and opinion; his lack of attention to literature, philosophy and a r t ; his incompetence to arrive at reasonable conclusions where the contemporary evidence is doubtful or scanty; his general carelessness in the use of authorities and in chronology; his credulity in accepting every charge against those whom he dislikes and his exaggerated scepticism in challenging every accusation against tyrannical or aristocratic governments; the inconsistencies that mar his judgment; his failure to take into consideration historical circumstances in estimating the worth of institutions; and worst of all, the false statements into which his prejudice sometimes led him. Y e t even Macaulay, who long since brought out these points, 71 is constrained to give M i t f o r d credit f o r being one of the first to attempt to follow the contemporary sources closely, exercising due scepticism where non-contemporary accounts were concerned. M i t f o r d was also one of the first, as Macaulay said, to portray the characters of ancient history as individuals rather than as mere personifications of virtue or vice; while Clinton complimented him not only f o r a general adherence to fact superior to previous writers, but specifically f o r the realism of his description of Athenian politics a f t e r the expulsion of the Thirty in 403 B. C. " F o r the twenty years which followed the expulsion of the Thirty, we have a living picture of the state of the popular feelings at Athens in the orations of L y s i a s ; and Mr. M i t f o r d has, with great acuteness and sagacity, laid open the political conditions of Athens, f r o m a critical examination of the works of that 71

201.

Op. cit.,

vol. i, pp. 172-201, esp. pp. 172, 178, 179, 185, 188-189, 191-

TRANSITION

IN ENGLISH

HISTORICAL

WRITING

orator, and of his contemporary A n d o c i d e s . "

72

Moreover,

M i t f o r d refrained f r o m indulgence in good stories or splendid sayings merely f o r their rhetorical effect.

His exagge-

rated prepossession f o r illiberal f o r m s of government w a s a u s e f u l corrective f o r preceding historians w h o were o f t e n absurd in their sentimentalities on the subject of liberty. analysis of the defects o f

An

Greek political life w a s badly

needed at the time, and M i t f o r d g a v e it, even if the task m i g h t have been done better.

Especially was it worthwhile to have

something nearer justice done to Philip of Macedon and D i o n y s i u s ; if M a c a u l a y objected to M i t f o r d ' s opinion of the proper medicine f o r Greek ills there arose a school of G e r m a n historians w h o thought more nearly like M i t f o r d .

Some-

thing of the shadow under which his name has long rested is due to the lack of s y m p a t h y of a liberal and then a democratic age with his political ideas.

H i s merits have been dimmed

b y this, and by the greater g l o r y of Grote, but his place in the history of history is secure because he was the first E n g lishman to write a history of Greece worthy of the name. 7 3 Gillies had already achieved some reputation as a professor and as a translator o f the classics before he turned to his History read

of Greece

his

Isocrates. 7 4

( 1 7 8 6 ) on the advice of friends w h o had

introductions

to

the

orations

of

Lysias

and

A s t r o n g W h i g , he wished to expose " the dan-

gerous turbulence of D e m o c r a c y and arraign the despotism of T y r a n t s " while s h o w i n g at the same time the incurable 72 H . F . Clinton, Fasti Hellenici ( O x f o r d , 1824), p. xlii. Clinton criticized M i t f o r d ' s chronology, especially because he followed Newton. Ibid., pp. x x i - x x i i . 7 3 " M i t f o r d w a s a bad scholar, a bad historian, and a bad writer of English. Y e t w e feel a lingering weakness f o r him. H e was the first w r i t e r of any note w h o found out that G r e e k history was a living thing with a practical bearing." Freeman, cited by G. P. Gooch, op. cit., p. 308. 74 The History of Ancient Greece, its Colonics edition, London, 1820), P r e f a c e , vol. i, p. vii.

and Conquests...

(6th

PARTY

HISTORY

TO

1800

93

evils of Republicanism and the positive advantages of Mona r c h y . " But in addition to inculcating a lesson which the American colonies had so recently and so stubbornly refused to learn, Gillies was inspired by a motive of pure scholarship, an ambition to write a connected history of Greece, based on all the available sources, observing the due sequence of cause and effect, eliminating the irrelevant and adventitious, and stressing literature, philosophy and the arts.™ This statement is practically an epitome of the historical ideals of the age to which Gillies belonged, but he differed from most of his contemporaries in the range of his scholarship. He not only showed a wide knowledge of Greek and Roman authors, and the works of French and Italians among the moderns, but was one of the few historians of his day to refer to German authorities in the original. Solidity of knowledge, combined with no small skill of exposition, explains the striking fact that Gillies retained his popularity in the face of Mitford and even into the age of Thirlwall and Grote.' 7 The most striking difference between Gillies and Mitford is in their treatment of democracy among the ancients. Gillies was the less prejudiced, for while he wished to warn against the dangers of popular government, he was not obsessed with this mission, but was more taken up with the story he had to tell. He was less concerned with abstract notions of what is good government, nor was he constantly contrasting the real or imaginary evils of the ancient Greeks with the supposed felicity of England under George III. We realize the difference in attitude of the two men when we find Gillies attributing the greatness of Athens to the degree of freedom her people enjoyed under a democratic government. " T h e power of Athens was great in ancient times; 75

Ibid., vol. i, p. iii.

70

Ibid., vol. i, pp. 233-234; vol. ii, pp. 46, 159.

77

A n edition was published at N e w Y o r k in 1852.

94

TRANSITION

IN ENGLISH

HISTORICAL

WRITING

but it became incomparably greater after the re-establishment of democracy. S o advantageous to the powers of the human mind is the enjoyment of liberty, even in its least perfect form, that in a few years a f t e r the expulsion of Hippias, the Athenians acquired an ascendant in Greece, which was fatal to their enemies, painful to their rivals, and even dangerous to themselves." 78 It is this lack of passion in his attitude than marks him as belonging to the placid years before the French Revolution. When that event occurred, however, it perhaps caused some heart-searching on the part of Gillies, as is indicated by the " Advertisement " to the third edition of his History, appearing 1 7 9 2 - 1 7 9 3 . A f t e r speaking of his studies in ancient politics, resulting in a translation of the political works of Aristotle, he says: I well know that it is a question with many, whether society be benefited by turning the attention of the people at large to politics; for a book, in whatever form it originally appears, now circulates, by the activity of the press, to every class of the people, through innumerable channels. But when the evil (if it be an evil) is already done, and the public mind is engrossed by political subjects alone, there cannot remain a doubt, that society will be benefited by substituting correct and salutary notions, in the stead of dangerous and absurd ones. Another striking divergence between M i t f o r d and Gillies is in their pictures of the fourth century. The latter, while portraying the Athenians of that period as licentious and decadent, divided them into three groups on the basis of their attitude towards Macedon. The pro-Macedonians, he denominated as " the infamous hirelings of Philip," 79 while Isocrates and Phocion, who regarded opposition to Philip as hopeless and therefore counseled their countrymen to culti78

Ibid., vol. i, p. 364.

78

Ibid., vol. ii, p. 63.

PARTY

HISTORY

95

TO 1800

vate his friendship, were talented and virtuous men. He regarded Demosthenes as honorable, patriotic, and supremely gifted, while he condemned the " artifices and crimes " 80 of Philip of Macedon, and spoke with sorrow of the subjection of Greece. But he believed that " . . . after the battle of Chaeronaea, there remained no further hopes of resisting the conqueror—the dignity of freedom was forever lost, and gloom of night and tyranny descended and thickened over Greece." 81 Thus Gillies was sensitive to the advantage of liberty enjoyed by the Greeks, even in democratic Athens; he regarded Macedon's victory as almost inevitable, but he detested the Machiavellian tactics of Philip. 82 In 1807 Gillies published four volumes on the History of the World from Alexander to Augustus, including the early history of the countries of the East before they came into contact with the Hellenistic states and with Rome. This was modeled after Herodotus' plan for his history of the Persian W a r s ; Gillies declared it better to proceed from the Greeks to the Romans, " from the stock to the branches," than to follow the practice set by Polybius of treating the Greeks after Alexander solely in connection with the expansion of Rome. 83 While it was commendable to draw attention to the independent importance of Hellenistic Greece and Hellenistic Asia, Gillies was less successful in this venture than 80

Ibid., vol. iv, p. 238.

81

Ibid., vol. iv, p. 230.

82

Gillies returned to this subject in A Vieiv of the Reign of Frederick II of Prussia; with a parallel between that Prince and Philip II of Macedon (Dublin, 1789), in which Frederick is warmly praised and Philip severely judged. Y e t Gillies also said that the vices of Philip were those of his situation and age, and that he would have been a virtuous Frederick had he lived in the A g e of Enlightenment. Op. cit., pp. 38-40. 83

History Augustus...

of the World from the Reign (London, 1807), vol. i, p. vi.

of Alexander

to that

of

96

TRANSITION

IN ENGLISH

HISTORICAL

WRITING

in his account of the classical period. The subject was more complicated, the lines of connection less easy to draw, and the material less available. The narrative frequently becomes episodical and the style more stilted. But Gillies continued his use of German works, and again attempted to describe economic and social conditions.84 If he failed to write a good history of the Hellenistic Age, we must ndt forget that a definitive history has not yet been written. In his fair and balanced judgment of Athens, his recognition of the importance of the Hellenistic Age, and of the necessity of including social, economic, and intellectual matters, Gillies was obviously superior to Mitford; while in his use of German authors he stood apart not only from Mitford, but from most of his contemporaries. But he was a less vigorous writer, a less pungent mind, than Mitford whom he could rival but not overtop. We may turn now to several authors of the French Revolutionary period who attempted to rewrite the history of the seventeenth century in the light of the new material uncovered since Hume and in some cases to add to the evidence themselves. While frankly admitting the importance of the work of Dalrymple and Macpherson, Thomas Somerville, Scottish divine and friend of William Robertson, retained a strong enthusiasm for the Revolution of 1688 and " those illustrious patriots, who, under Heaven, were the instruments of rescuing their contemporaries and posterity from the yoke of despotism." 85 In his History of the Political Transactions, and of Parties, from the Restoration of King Charles the 81

Over 50 pages are given to social, economic, and intellectual conditions and the improvement of Alexandria under Ptolemy Philadelphus. Ibid., vol. ii, pp. 286-342. 85 History of the Political Transactions, and of Parties, from storation of King Charles the Second, to the Death of King (London, 1792), p. 289.

the ReWilliam

PARTY

HISTORY

TO 1800

97

Second, to the Death of King William ( 1 7 9 2 ) he sought to incorporate the new evidence while giving it an interpretation different from that of the writers mentioned.88 Somerville was not so much the supporter of a party as an admirer of William I I I , the Revolution, and the Hanoverian Settlement. Indeed he minimized the importance of party difference, pointing out accurately enough that the evils prophesied from any given measure by its fanatical opponents generally do not materialize.87 The last chapter of his book contained a " comparative view " of the Whigs and Tories during William I l l ' s reign commenting on the inconsistencies and divided merits of both parties, and explaining their rivalries as chiefly a battle between the ins and outs. The century since the Revolution, he contended, had proved that, due to the excellencies of the Constitution, the business of the state went forward whichever party was in power.88 But although he was no Whig he sought to excuse the Whig leaders who had carried on a correspondence with James I I after 1688 and suggested that in some cases at least this was done with the knowledge and connivance of William in order to penetrate the secrets of James. 89 The History of Political Transaction was a solid, scholarly work. Somerville tells us that it was well received, especially by the important Monthly Review and London Review, but complains that the sale was not up to the expectations so aroused. This disappointment he attributed to the 86 See My 205-207. 87

History

Own Life of Political

and Times, Transactions,

1741-1814

(Edinburgh, 1 8 6 1 ) , pp.

pp. xxii-xxiii.

88

Ibid., pp. 561-579. Hallam thought Somerville suffered from " an excessive prejudice " against the Whigs of the times with which he dealt, " though he seems to adopt their principles." Constitutional History of England, vol. ii, p. 391, note. 89

History

of the Political

Transactions,

pp. 385-397.

98

TRANSITION

IN ENGLISH

HISTORICAL

WRITING

distracting influence of the French Revolution. 90 The book was praised by Malcolm Laing, Coxe, Robertson, Blair, and Dugald Stewart, while Horace Walpole, who was apt to be prodigal of his praise, "always declared [it] to be the most faultless account yet given of any interesting period of our history; and added, that its perfect impartiality would ever prevent its being popular." 91 Only F o x referred to its authority with disrespect. T o which Somerville replied that F o x could not have read or had forgotten having read his book since they did not disagree in fundamentals. 92 Possibly F o x was annoyed with Somerville for his participation in the Crusade against the French Revolution. 93 A second book by Somerville, The History of Great Britain during the Reign of Queen Anne ( 1 7 9 8 ) , reflected somewhat wider interests. A s he had previously written to defend the Revolution, Somerville was now writing to inspire Britain in her effort against France. " The History of the Reign of Queen Anne exhibits illustrious examples of the spirit and strength of Great Britain, in controlling the exorbitant power and ambition of France. . . . The record of past exertions, crowned with success, invigorates the public mind in the season of impending danger." 94 With this end 80

My Own Life and Times, p. 256.

81

Ibid., p. 257, note. Quot. f r o m Works Orford (London, 1797-98), vol. v, p. 561.

of Horace

Walpole,

Earl

of

82 My Own Life and Times, pp. 2 5 7 - 2 5 8 ; Observations on a passage in the Preface to Mr. Fox's Historical Work, relative to the Character of Dr. Somerville as an Historian ( H a w i c k , n. d . ) . T h i s anonymous pamphlet is tentatively ascribed to Somerville in the British M u s e u m Catalogue. H a w i c k w a s Somerville's birthplace. 83 Somerville produced two pamphlets: Observations on the Constitution and Present State of Britain (London, 1 7 9 3 ) ; and The Effects of the French Revolution with Respect to the Interests of Humanity, Liberty, Religion, and Morality (London, 1 7 9 3 ) . 84

History

1 7 9 8 ) , p. iii.

of Great Britain during the Reign of Queen Anne

(London,

PARTY

HISTORY

TO 1800

99

in view, and because he had been advised by Robertson that no account of Anne's reign could ignore the great victories of British arms and still catch the public eye, Somerville sought to broaden his treatment, and did so to some extent. However, he met with less immediate favor than in his previous book. " The reviewers were, in general, favorable," said the honest old man in his Memoirs, " but none of them expressed that decided approval which they had bestowed on the former volumes." 95 Whatever the reviewers thought about it, the History of Great Britain was a substantial book. Mainly confined to party politics and war, it presented a sober narrative of these topics, without rhapsody of partisanship or bombastic style. It is, therefore, one of the select few of the books of the period which is still useful to students." Somerville was a most industrious worker. He spent ten years, or rather his spare time during this period, on his first book, making use of documents in Edinburgh, the British Museum, and private collections." For the History of Great Britain he claimed to have read three times as many books and pamphlets as were cited in his text, comprising " with a very few exceptions " all the pamphlets and periodicals relating to party struggles and affairs of state during that reign. The latter part of this claim was perhaps a little exaggerated, but he had undoubtedly done a surprisingly large amount of reading. He tried to catch the spirit of the past and secure illuminating anecdotes or knowledge of particular events through his use of periodicals. But he did not ignore unpublished matter from the Shrewsbury, Hardwicke, Townshend, O r f o r d and Walpole papers, the records in the Registry office at Edinburgh, the Minutes of the Privy Council 85

My Ozvn Life and Times, p. 293.

86

Godfrey Davies, op. cit., p. 20.

97

My Own Life and Times, pp. 207-213.

I00

TRANSITION

IN ENGLISH

HISTORICAL

WRITING

a n d documents in the State P a p e r Office at L o n d o n . 9 8

At

first he h a d planned a v o l u m e o f original papers c o v e r i n g the y e a r s 1660 to 1 7 1 4 , but abandoned the p r o j e c t w h e n the w a r with France broke o u t . " T h e standard o f criticism applied to these sources is best explained in S o m e r v i l l e ' s o w n w o r d s : 1 0 0 T o approach as near as possible to that impartiality which is the prime excellence of history, I have employed every expedient for enabling me to estimate the character of the several authors whom I have cited as vouchers for my facts. I have traced the connections, patrons, private characters, and party bias of such as have written the history of their own times; I have attentively collected in my common-place book all the circumstances, tending to suggest suspicion concerning the testimony of contemporary authors, either in general or in particular instances; and I am not conscious of having admitted any fact relative to party affairs, upon the word of a party writer, without collateral evidence. I have embraced every opportunity to obtain intelligence from persons, whose local residence afforded them the best opportunity of information concerning the credit of foreign historians who have treated of continental transactions during the reign of Louis X I V . T h u s , while S o m e r v i l l e m a y be said to h a v e w r i t t e n w i t h a propagandist purpose and showed in some respects o n l y a commonplace appreciation o f the nature of h i s t o r y , 1 0 1

we

remember h i m t o d a y rather f o r his industry and care in w o r k i n g honestly a n d s t r a i g h t f o r w a r d l y f r o m g o o d sources. 98

History

of Great

Britain

during

the reign

of

Queen

Anne,

pp. v - x ,

xiii-xiv. 99

H e confined h i m s e l f t o publishing some o r i g i n a l papers at the end of

t h e Queen

Anne,

100

Ibid.,

101

In general

school.

389-390-

pp. 597-658.

pp. x i i - x i i i .

Political

he adhered t o the ideas of the p r a g m a t i c , Transactions,

pp. x x i i - x x i i i ; Queen

Anne,

rationalistic pp. iii, 247;

PARTY

HISTORY

TO

1800

IOI

The movement for parliamentary reform was the inspiration of the works of T . H. B. Oldfield dealing with the important subject of the history of representation.102 A s early as 1792 he compiled An Entire and Complete History . . . of the Boroughs of Great Britain, which was followed in 1797 by a History of the Original Constitution of Parliaments, from the time of the Britons to the present day. . . . These works were revised, combined and enlarged in 1 8 1 6 as The Representative History of Great Britain and Ireland (6 vols.). Oldfield believed firmly in the existence of a parliament among the Britons and Anglo-Saxons. Every freeman had the right of attending until the time of Alfred who introduced the representative system because of the physical impossibility of getting all the people together. " The democracy of England " was not overthrown, however, until the Norman Conquest and was restored with parliament in the reign of Henry I I I . Oldfield maintained that the people had in the past enjoyed the right to equal representation and annual parliaments, and made no secret of his desire to aid the cause of parliamentary reform by his studies. He chided historians for their neglect of the Anglo-Saxon period, the period of constitutional freedom, and their indifference to the important topic of the history of representation. 103 But polemic was mainly conspicuous in prefaces and introductions; and the material he assembled was of considerable value to later students of parliamentary history. Oldfield was himself engaged in election business and knew intimately " the structure of politics " of his day. Porritt cited him several times 104 and more recently Namier has 102 Representative History 1 8 1 6 ) , vol. i, pp. vi-vii.

of

103 History of the Original 1797), vol. i, pp. vii-viii. 101

E . Porritt, The Unreformed

Great

Britain

Constitution

of

and Ireland

(London,

Parliaments

(London,

House of Commons

(Cambridge, 1903).

j02

TRANSITION

IN ENGLISH

HISTORICAL

WRITING

spoken of him with gratitude. His books were, says the latter, 105 " a mine worked by generations of historians, with little or no attempt on their part to refine the ore." Bryan Edwards' History of the British Colonies in the West Indies ( 1 7 9 3 ) was in part at least a product of the growing interest in slavery and therefore may be noted with party histories. Edwards had lived many years in the West Indies and based his book in large measure upon personal experience. He was much better in his description of contemporary conditions than as an historian. His extremely interesting section on slavery and the slave trade 106 included a moderate defence of those institutions, and it is for such matter, as well as for his opinions regarding the authority of the British Parliament, in which he represented views of the West India planters, that he is remembered today. 107 If not a gifted historian, he was a clear-headed and attractive author who deserved the renown he won. L . J. Namier, The Structure (London, 1929), vol. i, p. 93.

105

III

106History of the British 1806), vol. ii, pp. 235-370. 107R.

Colonics

L. Schuyler, Parliament

1929), PP- 137-138, 254.

of Politics

at the Accession

in the West

and the British

Indies Empire

of

George

(Philadelphia, (New

York,

C H A P T E R S I G N S OF C H A N G E ,

IV

1 7 6 0 - 1 8 0 0 : I,

PRIMITIVISM

T o the extent that the rationalistic writers sought to enrich the content o f history by the inclusion of matter of a nonpolitical character their ideals continued to receive at least lipservice until well into the nineteenth century. O n the other hand there w e r e very f e w practitioners of the conjectural method a f t e r 1 7 8 0 ; and other aspects of rationalistic historiography, particularly the narrow sympathies that could find so little w o r t h in the civilization before 1500, were soon assailed w i t h criticism.

T h i s w a s particularly the case a f t e r

1760 w h e n certain intellectual changes bound to find echo a m o n g historical writers were already apparent.

M o s t im-

portant w a s the gradual uncovering of a body of material, chiefly literary, that might serve as the basis of a new interpretation of the past.

A g o o d many of the poems of old

Celtic bards came to light, 1 the literature of the ancient Scandinavians w a s slowly made familiar in E n g l a n d l o w i n g P e r c y ' s Reliques medieval revival began. 3

of Ancient

Poetry

2

and, fol-

( 1 7 6 5 ) , a distinct

A t the same time the industry o f

archaeological antiquarians like G o u g h and Grose was both 1 E. D. Snyder, The Celtic (Cambridge, Mass., 1923).

Revival

in English

Literature,

I/60-1800

- F. E. Farley, Scandinavian Influences in the English Romantic Movement (Harvard University Studies and Notes in Philology and Literature, vol. ix, Boston, 1903). H . A . Beers, A History of English Romanticism in the Eighteenth Century ( N . Y . , 1899) ; W . L . Phelps, The Beginnings of the English Romantic Movement (Boston, 1893). 3

103

TRANSITION

IN ENGLISH

HISTORICAL

WRITING

an expression of and a stimulus towards new

historical

perspectives. 4 Associated with these trends w a s the gradual emergence o f the " Noble S a v a g e " myth. 5

T h e reports o f

mission-

aries and travelers brought a good deal of attention to modern savages, and were apt to give a favorable picture of their condition.

Since such accounts of modern savages were re-

garded b y writers of conjectural history as sound evidence f o r the reconstruction of the " rude " stages of all peoples, there w a s a natural tendency to idealise ancient as well as modern primitive peoples.

National partiality led to bestow-

i n g this idealisation upon particular tribes.

T h i s was par-

ticularly true of the Irish and the Scots who, because " a people dissatisfied with their present condition grasp at any visions of their past or future g l o r y , " as Gibbon said, 6 had long been accustomed to compensate f o r present subordination to the E n g l i s h by painting a picture of a remote and glorious origin. 7

Their national susceptibilities seem to have been

* C. L . Eastlake, A History

of the Gothic

Revival

(London, 1872).

H . N . Fairchild, The Noble Savage ( N . Y . , 1928) and Chauncey B. T i n k e r , Nature's Simple Plan ( N e w Haven, 1922), especially on the connection between " A n c i e n t Bard and Noble S a v a g e " , Chapter I I I . 5

6 E . Gibbon, Decline p. 40, note iii.

and Fall

(ed. Bury, London, 1900-1902), vol. iii,

7 H e c t o r Boece or Boethius (History of Scotland from the Earliest Times to James III, 1527) said the Scots were descended f r o m Scota, daughter of Pharaoh, and gave a long line of kings of Scotland b e f o r e Malcolm Canmore w h o m modern scholarship has rejected. Boece w a s followed by George Buchanan (Historia Scotorum, 1582). T h e Irish questioned the authenticity of this history, e. g. Geoffrey Keating ( H i s t o r y of Ireland to the English Invasion, 1685) and Roderic O'Flaherty ( O g y g i a , seu rerum Hibernicarum chronologia, 1685). Sir George Mackenzie defended the antiquity of the Scottish line of kings and asserted that Ireland had been colonized f r o m Caledonia ( D e f e n c e of the Royal Line of Scotland, 1685). H i s competence for historical research may be judged f r o m the fact that he said his office as Lord Advocate placed upon him the duty of resisting any attempt to lessen the antiquity of the line of

PRIM IT

IVISM

very tender indeed in the eighteenth century when long standing prejudices against them were being more widely spread by literary men addressing a rapidly growing reading public.8 T h e Irish, too, accustomed though they were to being called barbarians, were incensed against the Scots at this time because of the contemptuous treatment they received at the hands of Scottish historians like Hume, Dalrymple, and Macpherson; while the claim that Ossian had been a Caledonian rather than an Irish poet was a bitter blow to their pride—as well as convincing some among them that Macpherson must be a forger. 9 Scottish sensibilities, on the other hand, were inflamed by any disbelief, especially English disbelief, in the genuineness of the Ossianic poems and the Scottish kings. A beginning of critical scholarship was made by Father T . Innes (Critical Essay on the Ancient Inhabitants of the Northern Parts of Britain or Scotland, 1729). S i r W a l t e r Scott contributed an interesting article on such histories to the Quarterly Review, 1829, in a criticism of T y t l e r ' s History of Scotland. 8 See " T h e W i l d I r i s h : A Study of some English Satires against the Irish, Scots, and W e l s h " by E. D . Snyder ( M o d e r n Philology, vol. xvii, Chicago, 1919-1920, pp. 687-725). H e shows that there was a continuous stream of anti-Celtic feeling which had become habitual by the eighteenth century and thinks this an important element in slowing up the Celtic revival in literature. It would also tend to intensify racial and national interpretations of history. O n anti-Scottish feeling in London see Macaulay's History as cited in A . S. G. Canning, History in Scott's Novels (London, 1905, pp. 307-308; also Macaulay's Essays, Critical, Historical and Miscellaneous ( N . Y . , i860), vol. vi, pp. 39-40. F o r instances of Scotsmen living in London who changed their names f r o m Scottish forms to accommodate English prejudice see R . K e r r , Memoirs of the Life, Writings, and Correspondence of William Smellie (Edinburgh, 1 8 1 1 ) , vol. i, pp. 436-437. O n the g r o w t h of the reading public in the eighteenth century see A . S. Collins, The Profession of Letters: A Study of the Relations of Author to Patron, Publisher, and Public, 1780-1832 (London, 1928), w h o says (p. 22) : " A f t e r 1760 there was a plentiful demand f o r a writer to supply. People w e r e beginning to read everywhere, even in a small w a y in the little towns and villages of the W e s t . "

" S e e infra,

pp. 117-119.

lo6

TRANSITION

IN ENGLISH

HISTORICAL

WRITING

authenticity of Scottish history. 10 When conditioned by a rigorous scholarship, the nationalist impulse has sometimes made valuable accessions to learning, but at this time it was more apt to run off into the most vitriolic polemic or the most imaginative reconstructions of history. This tendency was aided by the interest shown in language as a guide to historical truth. There was a considerable though crude and unscientific interest in philological studies and identity of language was taken as the key to the identification of race. 11 The influence of French writers (or writers in French) on the shift of attitude towards primitive times was exerted chiefly through Paul Henri Mallet whose Introduction a I'histoire de Dannemarc ( 1 7 5 5 ) was translated into English by Bishop Percy and published as Northern Antiquities in 1770. But Mallet's work was known in England before that time and had already drawn attention to the ancient Scandinavians. 12 Though seeking only to write sober history Mallet's picture of the ancient Scandinavians was so favorable as easily to lend itself to idealisation of these primitive people and such was its effect. 13 10

See infra,

note 34.

11

Some examples are given by Miss Lois Whitney in her " E n g l i s h Primitivistic Theories of E p i c O r i g i n s " (Modern Philology, vol. x x i , 1923-24), p. 35s, vis., A . Smith, Considerations concerning the first formations of Languages ( 1 7 6 1 ) ; J a m e s H a r r i s , Hermes, or a Philosophical Inquiry concerning Universal Grammar ( 1 7 6 5 ) ; J a m e s P a r s o n s , Remaitvs of Japhet: Being Historical Enquiries into the affinity and origin of European Language ( 1 7 6 7 ) ; L o r d Monboddo, Of the Origin and Progress of Languages ( 1 7 7 3 - 1 7 9 2 ) . F o r the use of language as a key to race see P e r c y , Northern Antiquities (London, 1 7 7 0 ) , vol. i, p. x i x ; J . M a c pherson, Introduction to the History of Great Britain and Ireland (Dublin, 1 7 7 1 ) , p. 1 9 ; and J . Pinkerton, as cited in note 38, infra, p. 1 1 5 . 13

Goldsmith reviewed the Introduction April, 1757. F a r l e y , op. cit., p. 3 1 , note 5.

in the Monthly

Reviciv

for

18 P a u l van Tieghem, Le preromantisme ( P a r i s , 1 9 2 4 ) , pp. 1 1 3 - 1 1 5 . A l s o on the influence of Mallet see F a r l e y , op. cit., p. 3 1 , note 5 and

107

PR1MITIVISM

L i t e r a r y primitivism and medievalism were the t w o intellectual changes that found most immediate response a m o n g historians, perhaps chiefly, as we shall see a little later, because o f the activities of Ossianic Macpherson.

B u t in the

long run the g r o w t h o f the historical method in religious a n d political t h o u g h t 1 4 and still more the Burkite reaction of the latter part of the century were perhaps even more important. " T h e belief that political values are to be judged in their relation with the historical community " seems, it has been said, 1 5

" the

final

teaching o f

Burke's

political

theory."

B u r k e ' s reverence f o r the past and consciousness of the past operating in the present must inevitably turn men m o r e towards the study o f history and cause them to regard it in a new and more respectful way.

T h e past became not merely

a preparation f o r the present but its tutor also.

In the case

of E n g l a n d , moreover, attention w a s attracted to just those periods ( A n g l o - S a x o n and medieval) in which the f o u n d a tions o f the government had been laid but which had been hitherto somewhat slighted. Meanwhile

other

f o r c e s — t h e Evangelical

Revival,

the

g r o w t h of nationalist feeling, the movement for r e f o r m , the spread of interest in the O r i e n t — a l l helped in greater or lesser degree to t r a n s f o r m historical writing. T h e first striking evidence o f this was connected with the study of European origins.

A purely intellectual interest in

such matters w a s a common phenomenon, an aspect o f the " New

History."

16

E v e n H u m e spoke g l o w i n g l y of

his

p. 3 5 ; Beers, op. cit., pp. 190-191, 196; Phelps, op. cit., pp. 139-141, 161162; Hélène Stadler, Paul-Henri Mallet, 1730-1807 (Lausanne, 1924), Chapter X I I I . 11

O n this subject there is much material in S i r Leslie Stephen, op. cit.,

e. g., vol. i, pp. 166 et seq., 253-273, 377*379. et passim. 1 5 A . Cobban, Edmund Burke and the Revolt Century (London, 1929), p. 258. 16

Lois

Whitney

in

her

" English

against

Primitivistic

the

Theories

Eighteenth of

Epic

log

TRANSITION

IN ENGLISH

HISTORICAL

WRITING

delight in being " transported into the remotest ages of the world." 17 But a new stage was reached about the middle of the century when there arose a controversy about the origins of modern peoples, surcharged with quite unphilosophical emotions, strikingly similar in tone to the later quarrels between the proponents of Celts and Germans, and readily associating itself with romanticist idealization of primitive man. This was partly due to the long-standing tradition of ascribing the best possible ancestry to one's own people, but was also a result of the intellectual changes that have already been mentioned. Especially may it be ascribed to the activity of James Macpherson. Not only did his Ossianic poems cast an epic glamour over primitive man, but in the prefaces thereto Macpherson deliberately drew attention to their historical values. Thus in the " Dissertation" prefixed to Fingal ( 1 7 6 2 ) the argument is advanced that the British Celts came originally from Gaul and passed thence to Ireland by way of Caledonia. The footnotes to the poems explain allusions and give a definite impression of a texte incdit.18 Similarly in Temora ( 1 7 6 3 ) Macpherson says that Ossian has preserved the history of the migration of the Caledonians into Ireland, 19 and that Temora is " infinitely more valuable O r i g i n s " ( M o d e r n Philology, vol. xxi, Chicago, 1923-24, pp. 337-378) gives evidence to show that at Aberdeen and especially at Edinburgh there was in the forties and fifties of the eighteenth century a large group, including most of the eminent Scotsmen of the day, enormously interested in tracing the primitive origins of society. She suggests that Macpherson may have derived his interest in primitive poetry f r o m them. 17

Hume, " Of the Study of History ", Essays,

vol. ii, p. 389.

18

Fingal, an Ancient Epic Poem in Six Books: Together with several other poems, composed by Ossian the son of Fingal. Translated from the Gaelic language by James Macpherson (London, 1762), pp. i-xvi. On Macpherson see also supra, pp. 73-77. 19

Temora, p. ix.

an Ancient

Epic

Poem

in Eight

Books

(London,

1763),

PRIMITIV

ISM

109

than Fingal in the light it throws on the history of the times." 20 As Professor van Tieghem has so neatly said of these prefaces : 2 1 Il n'était presque jamais question là—dedans de littérature et de poésie ; on y trouvait quelques vues morales sur les vicissitudes de l'esprit humain à travers les âges, une vague philosophie de l'histoire, étroite et dédaigneuse, qui rangeait l'auteur parmi les partisans décidés de l'âge des lumières, et surtout des vues historiques et géographiques sur les Calédoniens, sur leurs rapports avec les Germains, avec les autres Celtes, avec les Irlandais en particulier, sur leur histoire ancienne et leurs moeurs. Macpherson cherche à établir solidement son Ossien écossais, non irlandais—il se moque longuement et lourdement des poèmes irlandais du moyen âge—à le situer dans l'histoire, à le rattacher au plus grand nombre possible des faits authentiques ou plausibles . . . tout cela est destinée à donner l'impression d'un monument historique inédit. A n d Ossian was taken as sober history with some interesting results. The idea of the superiority of Northern peoples was given an impetus because now the Northerners had an epic poet at least equal, possibly superior, to Homer. 2 2 Primitive man, especially the Celt, was ennobled by a favorable picture of Caledonian manners, which Macpherson contrasted with the degenerate Romans of the third century. And new life was given to the ancient quarrel as to whether Ireland had been colonized f r o m Caledonia or Caledonia f r o m Ireland. Nor were the historians backward in employing the evi20

Ibid., p. xviii.

21

Op. cit., p. 257.

22 " D ' O s s i a n , encore plus que de Mallet, date la croyance à la supériorité morale du N o r d ; supériorité non pas transitoire et due à un état social plus f a v o r a b l e à la conservation des vertus naturelles, mais permanente et essentielle, due à la conformation physique et morale des individus." V a n T i e g h e m , Le Prcromantisme ( P a r i s , 1 9 2 4 ) , p. 263.

I jo

TRANSITION

dence of Ossian.

IN ENGLISH

HISTORICAL

WRITING

L o r d K a m e s used the poems to illustrate

the purity of manners in simple societies; 2 3 while R o b e r t H e n r y cited them as authorities. 2 4

B u t the extent to w h i c h

a really intelligent writer could place reliance on such sources is best shown perhaps by a passage in H u g o A r n o t ' s of Edinburgh

(1779).

History

A r n o t pointed out that, generally

speaking, manners improve w i t h the progress of arts and sciences until the acme of refinement is reached, a f t e r w h i c h deep corruption sets in.

H e then continues:

It would seem that there is one exception to this rule, namely, in the first stage of society, when hunting and war are the sole occupations of a people; or, at least, that such an exception is to be found among the ancient Caledonians. T o reject the authenticity of the poems of Ossian, we apprehend impossible; yet, to admit such dignified sentiments, such purity of manners, as have not prevailed generally among the most polished nations, to subsist in the earliest and most illiterate stages of society, contradicts every principle which an observation of its progress has enabled us to form. 25 H e finds it still more unaccountable that w i t h the d a w n of letters and Christianity the Caledonians should degenerate f r o m the purity of Ossianic times into the gross barbarism that undoubtedly characterized them f o r many eras. W e shall not attempt to reconcile difficulties by sophistical reasoning, but will rather rest with the mortifying acknowledgement, that, although the fact undoubtedly so stands, we cannot satisfactorily account for it.20 In other words, in this author's mind, the evidence of O s s i a n 2 3 Henry Home, Lord Kames, Sketches of the History edition, Glasgow, 1819), vol. i, pp. 122, 125 ct seq. 24

See note 9 to Chapter II.

25History 26

of Man (new

of Edinburgh

Ibid., p. 52.

(Edinburgh, new ed. 1788), pp. 51-52.

PRIM ITIV

ISM

I11

outweighs all that can be placed in the scales against it from logic, classical authorities, medieval chronicles, or antiquarian research. But if we are surprised at the case of Arnot, who apparently saw no reason to suspect Macpherson of dishonesty, what shall we say of John Whitaker, who, in his criticism of Macpherson's Introduction to the History of Great Britain and Ireland (to be presently referred to more fully) convicts its author of deliberate falsification, and yet in his own History of Manchester not only accepts Ossian as authentic, but refuses to argue with those who do not? Even the archsceptic Gibbon was half inclined to make Ossian one of his authorities, and his picture of Caledonian manners is thought to show the influence of the spirit of Macpherson's poetry. 27 The much less critical Millar had little hesitation in accepting Ossian as a source, a circumstance perhaps connected with his feeling that the period of origins had been unduly neglected by historians and that the foundations of the constitution had been laid there.28 We can only conclude from such instances that enthusiasm for the primitive had gone so far that men were emotionally predisposed to accept as historic a picture of the ancient Celts which was really manufactured to fit their mood, and that from this picture they derived further stimulus to their idealization of the remote past and their vigorous controversies over ancient peoples. Macpherson reinforced his point of view on the peoples of Europe in his Introduction to the Ancient History of Great Britain and Ireland ( 1 7 7 1 ) , a work in which he drew upon materials collected by his kinsman Dr. John Macpherson. 28 Decline and Fall, vol. i, pp. 129-130, vol. ii, p. 64 note; P. van Tieghem, op. cit., p. 258; J . S. Smart, James Macpherson (London, 1905), pp. 104-105. 28 Origin of the Distinction of Ranks (4th ed., London, 1806), pp. 12, 62; Historical View of the English Government (London, 1787), p. 4. 29

John Macpherson, Critical Dissertations on the Origin, Antiquities,

j 12

TRANSITION

IN ENGLISH

HISTORICAL

WRITING

On the basis of language and ancient writers the author of the Introduction identified three great races in Europe—the Sarmatians, the Slavs, and the Celts. Modern Europe was peopled by a mixture of the three, with the Celts predominating in France, Spain, and Italy; the Sarmatians in Germany, England, and a great part of Scotland; and the Slavs in the regions north of the Black Sea. At one time, however, the Celts, with whom " philosophy " had originated, had colonized Britain; and Macpherson was mainly desirous of analyzing their religion, government, learning and social life at this time. Admitting their violence and ferocity, he yet stressed the virtues of a people who were " far removed from the deceit and duplicity of modern times. They were always open, sincere, and undisguised; simple, good-natured, and void of malignity; and though cruel, and sometimes barbarous, to their enemies, they were kind and compassionate to the suppliant and unfortunate." 30 From ancient Caledonia, Ireland had been colonized by the Scots (a Celtic people), whence it followed, as Macpherson pointedly remarked, that the Irish claim to a high civilization in the remote past— before the golden age of Greece—was ridiculous. 31 It will be seen that there was a three-fold tendency to the influence of Macpherson on history and literature. He marked a definite stage in the rise of " primitivism," especially by his Ossianic poems; he selected the Celts for particular adulation among primitive peoples, thus throwing down the gauntlet to other writers who were not slow to take Language, Government, Manners, and Religion, of the antient Caledonians. their Posterity the Picts, and the British and Irish Scots (Dublin, 1767). Macpherson argued that the Celts were the ancestors of most European nations and that the ancient inhabitants of Ireland came from Caledonia. 80 Introduction to the Ancient (Dublin, 1 7 7 1 ) , p. 199. 31

Ibid., pp. 59-74.

History

of Great Britain

and

Ireland

PRIM IT IVISM

113

it up in an effort to destroy his theories; and he gave new impetus to a long-standing quarrel between Irish and Scots as to their historical precedence by intervening on behalf of the latter. Thus he foreshadows some of the most characteristic phases of Nationalism and Romanticism. Yet he was himself no nationalist, and so far from being a consistent romanticist that he begins his Introduction by apologizing for an essay in the " sterile subject " of antiquities, comparing such an enterprise to exploration in a desert.32 So in the field of poetry, as William Lyon Phelps has said, 33 his tastes were classical in spite of the Romanticist influence of his Ossian; and his political history of Great Britain, which we have discussed in the previous chapter, shows no serious departure from the conceptions of Hume. But such inconsistencies are of course natural in a transitional age. None of the writers who defended Macpherson's Celticist position showed as much learning and acuteness as he; 3 4 but the palm for illogicality and unabashed manipulation of evidence must be awarded to the Galic [iic] Antiquities ( 1 7 8 0 ) of John Smith. This work pictured the Celts as an almost perfect people, highly civilized from remote times, and through their Druidic priests the teachers of the Greeks. Smith had little difficulty in circumventing any evidence against the character of his beloved people. For example, Roman writers accused the Druids of human sacrifice. Ibid., pp. 22, 157. :,s 31

W. L. Phelps, op. cit., pp. 150-151.

E. g. John Lanne Buchanan, A Defcncc of the Scots Highlanders, in general; and some learned characters, in particular: with a new and satisfactory account of the Picts, Scots, Fingal, Ossian, and his Poems; as also of the Macs, Clans, Bodotria. And several other particulars respecting the high Antiquities of Scotland (London, 1794), the response of an outraged Celticist to John Pinkerton; James Tytler, A Dissertation on the Origin and Antiquity of the Scottish Nation (London, 1795) ; and John Macpherson's work already cited.

TRANSITION

IN ENGLISH

HISTORICAL

WRITING

Smith replied that the R o m a n s , being distant f r o m the Celts, were ignorant of their true character, and, being enemies, were prejudiced against them.

Perhaps, therefore, he first

says, they were mistaken in their testimony; and f r o m this passes easily to the conclusion that evidently

they were misled

by ignorance and prejudice. 3 5 A strong reply to Macpherson w a s made by John W h i t a k e r in his Genuine History

of the Britons

asserted ( 1 7 7 2 ) .

takes up point by point the assertions made in the

This

Introduc-

tion, convicting the author of misuse of authorities to the extent of misquotation and accusing him of wholesale plagiarism f r o m Innes. 36

Whitaker

smiles at " that

strange

humour which has been taken up by so many antiquarians, of m a g n i f y i n g the glory and extending the possessions of the Celtae,"

37

but he was, nevertheless, enthusiastic f o r the study

of primitive times.

In this particular essay, he presented a

theory of the populating of the British Isles in opposition to that of Macpherson, tracing t w o colonies of Celts f r o m the continent into Britain, deriving the Irish f r o m these and the Scots f r o m the Irish. M u c h more striking in its approximation to some characteristic nineteenth-century Dissertation

notions, was John

on the Origin of the Scythians

Pinkerton's

or Goths

(1787).

In brief outline, his argument runs as f o l l o w s : Europe w a s first inhabited by Celts and by the Iberians of Spain w h o came from North Africa.

T h e s e peoples were hopelessly barbaric,

much inferior to the three invading peoples—the Goths, the Sarmatians, and the Huns.

T h e latter corresponded to the

modern T a r t a r s , while the Sarmatians became Slavs. 35 Galic Antiquities: burgh, 1780), p. 12. 38

Genuine History

155-156. 37

Ibid., p. 22.

consisting

of a history

of the Britons

Asserted

of the Druids...

But it (Edin-

(London, 1772), pp. 41-42,

PR1M1TIV1SM

is the Goths with w h o m Pinkerton w a s chiefly concerned. H e labors to prove that they were really the Scythians o f ancient authors and came f r o m Persia.

A l l the great peoples

of h i s t o r y — T h r a c i a n s , Illyrians, Greeks, Romans, Germans, and S c a n d i n a v i a n s — b e l o n g e d to this stock, which thus became a kind of eighteenth-century equivalent to the A r y a n Race. T h e s e conclusions were based on the testimony of classical writers, on identity of manners, and especially on the a r g u ment f r o m language, which Pinkerton regarded as i n f a l l i b l e . " T h e distinctive feature o f the Dissertation

is its thorough-

g o i n g racialism, its anticipation o f Nordicism.

Pinkerton

accused Pelloutier, f o r w h o m as f o r Macpherson he had the utmost contempt, o f a desire " to show Gaul the parent country of modern nations in Europe, and thus to support the French dream o f universal m o n a r c h y . "

39

clared, were an inferior people by mture,

T h e Celts, he deincapable of l i f t i n g

themselves out of s a v a g e r y ; they had never risen even to the stage of barbarism.

N o great men had ever been of pure

Celtic blood, while Celtic people like the Highlanders of Scotland must remain savages unless they received large a d m i x tures of Gothic blood. 40 3 8 " L a n g u a g e is a most permanent matter, and not even total revolutions in nations can change it. A philosopher well told Augustus, that it w a s not in his power to make one word a citizen of Rome. W h e n a speech changes, it is in many centuries; and it only changes clothes, not body and soul." John Pinkerton, A Dissertation on the Origin and Progress of the Scythians or Gcths (London, 1787), p. 109. H e r e f e r s to " that infallible argument, Identity of Language." Ibid., p. 143. " A nation speaking the Gothic tongue can no more be the same with one speaking the Slavonic, than a Swede can be a Russian." Ibid., p. 19. Pinkerton refers to Sheringham for his three great arguments f o r the origins of nations. 39

Ibid., p. 106.

T h e Celts " are savages, have been savages since the world began, and will be f o r ever savages while a separate people; that is, while themselves, and of unmixt blood." Ibid., p. 92. " W i s d o m and ingenuity may be traced among the Samoieds, Laplanders, Negroes, etc., but among the Celts, none of native g r o w t h . " Ibid., p. 102. 40

j x6

TRANSITION

IN ENGLISH

HISTORICAL

WRITING

Equally vigorous w a s his eulogy of the Goths, especially of the Germans w h o overthrew the R o m a n Empire and w e r e the ancestors of the dominant peoples of modern Europe. T h e y were virtuous, wise and courageous, even in their m o s t barbarous days. these?

" R o m e , R o m e , w h a t were thy laurels to

Great and divine p e o p l e ! " 4 1

he exclaims,

after

quoting some tributes of late R o m a n writers to G e r m a n virtues.

H o w noble these barbarians w h o had shed less

blood in o v e r t h r o w i n g the Empire than the R o m a n s o f t e n spilled in a single w a r ; h o w deplorable that " t h e name o f Goths, the sacred name o f our forefathers, is an object o f detestation."

42

Rather, he declared, " I f

English, Scotish

[sic], I r i s h ; if French, Spaniard, Italian, German, Dutch, Swiss, Swede, or Dane, let the reader attend with reverence, as he peruses the sacred steps of his ancestors."

43

Such vehemence naturally aroused bitter opposition, and in a later w o r k Pinkerton admitted that his attacks on the Celts had gone too far.

H e explained them by disgust at the ridi-

culous eulogies of other writers, his resentment at those w h o had " exerted every art to calumniate our Gothic ancestors," and hi« desire to stimulate the Celts into becoming civilized, " while many late authors, by applauding their savage life, and contempt o f every civilized art, seemed to follow the dreams of Rousseau, which would restore mankind to a state of nature, that is, to lawless rapine and slaughter."

44

This

last quotation is significant in c l a r i f y i n g Pinkerton's position. H i s was no indiscriminate idealization of primitive times in general, any more than in the case of Macpherson's duction. 41

Ibid., p. i x .

42

Ibid., p. vii.

43

Ibid., p. 90.

44

An

Malcolm

Intro-

But he shared to the full the contemporary pas-

Enquiry III

into

the

or the year

History 1056

of

Scotland

preceding

the

reign

of

(ed. o f 1 7 9 4 ) , " A d v e r t i s e m e n t , " pp. 9-10.

PRIMITIVISM

117

sionate interest in primitive history, the controversy over the origins of European nations, and he gave to that controversy a distinct racialist tinge. I n many respects, as we shall see in considering his works apart f r o m this particular episode, he marks the rise of a new orientation of historical attitudes and of new methods in historical study. Suffice it to say at the moment that his Dissertation was widely referred to in the literature of its day. If he did not make converts of all, or many, of his readers, he at least familiarized them with an interpretation of history in terms of race and with the idea of the superiority of the race to which the Germans belonged. T h e credulities and fallacies of writers of whom Pinkerton, Macpherson and the rest were examples were ultimately given up, or replaced by other illusions, but the intense interest in origins so stimulated, the enthusiasm over primitive times, continued until it became a common phenomenon a m o n g even the greatest historians of the last century. T h e theories of the " Celtomaniacs " and their opponents were the crude archetypes of the A r y a n hypothesis of a later generation. Irish writers of this period were like the English and Scottish in that they combined the wildest theorizing with some substantial contributions to scholarship. Their theorizing was inspired by a desire to prove Ireland civilized at a time when its A n g l o - N o r m a n invaders were sunk in barbarism. T h u s Charles O'Conor argued that the Scots, the ancient inhabitants of Ireland, were the purest representatives of Celtic blood. 45 H e traced the Irish back to colonists brought f r o m Spain by " Milesius." Free f r o m invasion in 45 Dissertations on the Antient History of Ireland: wherein an Account is given of the Origine [sic], Government, Letters, Sciences, Religion Manners and Customs, of the antient Inhabitants (Dublin, 1753).

I !8

TRANSITION

IN ENGLISH

HISTORICAL

WRITING

the new country the " Genius of the People " 4 8 had developed a civilization unique in its noble simplicity: The manners of the antient Scots were, like their Theology, grafted upon Nature; a noble Simplicity prevailed over all their Customs and Arts. Grandeur was sustained without pageantry ; Dignity without Pomp; and Power without Terror. The Great trusted their Respect chiefly to great Actions without leaning on Sumptuous Equipages and brilliant outsides. . . . This frank, humane, and rational Way of Living was that of the original Celts, and of the Patriarchs themselves.47 In contrast to O'Conor, Charles Vallancey argued that the Irish were not Celts at all, but descendants of the " Skuthi," sons of Japhet, who had left their home around the Caspian Sea long before the Christian era. 48 They had been highly civilized even before this Hegira, one of their most important achievements being the invention of all kinds of ships and boats. Vallancey's mode of reasoning is sufficiently characterized by the fact that he used the maritime accomplishments of his " Skuthi " in ancient times to j u s t i f y British command of the seas in his own day. 49 A modern nationalist impulse appears in Sylvester O ' H a l loran's Introduction to the Study of the History of Ireland ( i 7 7 2 ) and his General History of Ireland (1778).50 46

Ibid., p. v.

47

Ibid., pp. 122-123.

48

A Vindication of the ancient History of Ireland; wherein is shown, I. The Descent of its old inhabitants from the Phoeno-Scythians of the East. II. The early Skill of the Phoeno-Scythians, in Navigation, Arts, and Letters. lit. Several Accounts of the Ancient Irish Bards, authenticated from parallel History, Sacred and Profane, etc., etc. The whole illustrated by notes and remarks on each chapter (Dublin, 1786). 49 50

Ibid., p. x x x i .

An Introduction to the Study of the History and Antiquities of Ireland: in which the assertions of Mr. Hume and other tvriters arc occasionally considered ... also tivo appendixes: containing I. Animadversions

PRIMITIVISM

119

O ' H a l l o r a n appealed to his countrymen to vindicate their " much neglected and much injured country "

51

by rewriting

its national history, the truth of w h i c h had been distorted through the ignorance and selfishness of alien p e o p l e s — R o m a n s , Scots, and English.

T h e Scottish historians o f

modern times were most a g g r a v a t i n g to O ' H a l l o r a n w h o took a much more rosy view of the Irish past than w a s to be f o u n d in their writings. 5 2 Such vagaries were not, of course, accepted by all historians. 5 3

Nevertheless O ' C o n o r , V a l l a n c e y and O ' H a l l o r a n

were all prominent writers of their day.

O ' C o n o r , indeed,

has been called " the most valuable servant Irish history had in the eighteenth century. . . . H e did much careful investigation into Irish history, but his published dissertations are marred by the influence of the theories o f O ' F l a h e r t y . " Vallancey's Collectanea

de rebus hibernicis

(1770-1804) was

one of the first publications o f texts and translations sources for early Irish history.

54

of

A recent authority concludes

on an Introduction to the History of Great Britain and Ireland, by J. Macpherson, Esq. 2. Observations on the Memoirs of Great Britain and Ireland, by Sir John Dalrymple (London, 1772). A General History of Ireland, from the earliest accounts to the close of the twelfth century, collected from the most authentic records. In which new and interesting lights arc thrown on the remote Histories of other Nations as well as of both Britains (London, 1778). O ' H a l l o r a n was also author of other works on Irish history and antiquities. 61

General History

of Ireland

(London, 1778), vol. i, p. x x x v i i i .

National pride also impelled T h o m a s Campbell to write his Strictures on the Ecclesiastical History of Ireland (Dublin, 1789). H e blamed the depressed state of the Irish on political and moral causes, and sought to prove they were not an inferior people by exhibiting their past services to culture. T h i s he did by going back to the early Middle A g e s , but he smiled at such wild ideas as those of O'Halloran, Vallancey, et al. 52

5 3 In addition to the previous note see T h o m a s Leland, History Ireland (London, 1773), vol. i, pp. vi-vii. 5 4 James F . Kenney, The ( N . Y . , 1929), pp. 56-57.

Sources

for

the Early

History

of

of

Ireland

120

TRANSITION

IN ENGLISH

HISTORICAL

WRITING

that Vallancey's " enthusiasm and the prestige which his position imparted, contributed very much to the advancement of Irish studies," 55 in spite of the fact that his own writings were ruined by absurd theories. Dr. Kenney has pointed o u t 5 6 that there was, indeed, among Irish writers of the later eighteenth century, quite a progress towards better knowledge of their national past. In the field of archaeological antiquities there were men like Mervyn Archdall 5 7 and E d ward Ledwich, 58 in literary antiquities Joseph C. W a l k e r 5 0 and Charlotte Brooke, 60 and many others. Moreover the appearance of societies to investigate Irish history was a symptom that the period of neglect and prejudice was passing. " T h e ' Romantic Movement,' the relaxation of the penal laws, the growth of an Irish national sentiment a m o n g the British colonists in Ireland, the influence of Vallancey and his friends, all made possible the development of a genuine movement for the rehabilitation of native Irish scholarship." 61 W e cannot conclude a chapter mainly devoted to illustrations of the new attitude towards the primitive without some mention of the relationship between the " Noble Savage," the sentimentalized savage of modern times, and historical writers. The obvious place to look for this is in histories of America. I n these naturally some time was spent on the Indian, but generally speaking his affairs were not a primary concern. Rather, historians were stimulated by interest in 55

Ibid., p. 59.

56

Ibid., ch. i.

67

Monastic on Hibcrnicum; or an history of the Abbics, other religious houses in Ireland (Dublin, 1786). 58

Antiquities

59

Historical

60

Reliques of Irish Poetry

61

Kenney, op. eit., p. 59.

of Ireland Memoirs

(Dublin, 1790).

of the Irish Bards

(Dublin, 1786).

(Dublin, 1789).

Priories,

and

PRIMITIV

ISM

121

the European colonists. A t the same time they echoed contemporary views of the savages in those sections of their works devoted to the original inhabitants of the New World. J. H. Wynne, in his General History of the British Empire in America ( 1 7 7 0 ) , gives a fairly extensive description of the Indians. He points to their endurance, in everything except hard labor, their respect for the laws of hospitality, and other qualities that provide material for romanticizing. But he sums up against the aborigines in no uncertain terms: 8 2 The North American natives are, in general, a wild and a faithless set of men. Their manners are a complication of ill-chosen customs, savage, ridiculous and barbarous. Whatever some may say of their genius, it is certainly not equal to that of the inhabitants of our world; and America is, in this sense, justly styled the younger sister of Europe. The pains taken to instruct these savages in the laws and religion, have been mostly thrown away, and so bigoted are they to their own manner of living, that some of them have been regularly bred, clothed, and educated, have thrown away their clothes, run into the woods, forsaken society, and returned to their own barbarous manners, preferring what they foolishly termed liberty, among their savannahs and vast forests to all the benefits enjoyed in a wellordered state. Previously W y n n e had pointed out that although one would expect the sons of A d a m to be equal, there appears to be a constitutional inferiority in some among them—an opinion that would be more likely to lead towards doctrines of the White Man's Burden than to sentimentalising about the savage virtues and genius. However, he does not j u s t i f y slavery, at least, although he expects it to continue as long as men prefer selfish interests to the dictates of humanity. The negro does not enter into his discussion at any length. 82 General History vol. i, p. 241.

of the British

Empire

in America

(London, 1770),

122

TRANSITION

IN ENGLISH

HISTORICAL

WRITING

Still less does W i l l i a m Robertson show any sentimentality in attitude.

T h e fourth and seventh books of his great

tory of America inhabitants.

His-

( i 7 7 7 ) contain an account of the primitive

H i s conclusion that the N e w W o r l d w a s first

colonized f r o m A s i a is reached by an admirable piece o f careful reasoning and is expressed in the clear, simple style of w h i c h he w a s master.

B u t his deep kinship with the E n l i g h t -

enment, his Calvinistic theology, and still more his ambition to write history purely objectively, all kept him f r o m any idealization of the Indian.

Realizing that his portrait w a s

less g l o w i n g than those o f some writers, he devoted a long note to corroborative evidence f r o m competent authorities, 6 3 and elsewhere lays d o w n his ideal of historical study : 6 4 In this [account], I aspire not at rivalling the great masters who have painted and adorned savage life, either in boldness of design, or in the glow and beauty of their colouring. I am satisfied with the more humble merit of having persisted with patient industry, in viewing my subject in many various lights, and collecting from the most accurate observers such detached, and often minute features, as might enable me to exhibit a portrait that resembles the original. Possibly C. H . A r n o l d gives, in his New and Universal

History

of North

and South

America

Impartial ( n o date,

probably 1781 or 1 7 8 2 ) , the opinion of the Indians held by the white colonists.

A t any rate he describes himself

as

" late of Philadelphia," and certainly he shows no more tendency to idealize the Indians than a conquering people generally display towards those w h o m they have dispossessed. H e calls the natives savage, fierce, and faithless, " possessing many of the vices and f e w of the virtues of wild nature; and also apt enough to adopt the crimes and excesses of civilized nations, as has o f t e n been found by experience whenever an 63

History

64

Ibid.,

of Amcrica, 395.

in Works,

v o l . vi, note lii, pp. 436-438.

PRIM

opportunity offered."

85

IT IV

123

ISM

Their primitive methods of getting

food sometimes reduced them to cannibalism when the hunting failed, and it was customary for sons to strangle their aged fathers lest the food supply fail.

Then, like W y n n e ,

he applies his observations to the Noble Savage myth by a d d i n g : " A n excellent refutation of those modern philosophers, w h o have affected to prefer a state of uncultivated nature to the refinements of civil society.

I f this needs a

further illustration, let the reader attend to some other customs which we shall have occasion to relate in the course of this history."

66

There were not lacking those w h o took a different attitude. One case is that of W i l l i a m Russell's History

of

America

( 1 7 7 8 ) , published a little later than Robertson's and showing evident signs of dependence on it.

Russell was, however,

capable of maintaining independent views and declared that the truth about the Indian must lie between the harsh j u d g ment of Robertson and the adulation of Ferguson, w h o had " ascribed to the Americans all the virtues and talents of man in his nude state, without making allowance for their physical insensibility or intellectual dullness."

67

The

Indians

were, according to Russell, a people worthy of admiration for their patriotism, their endurance, and their independence. T h e i r cruelty might arouse horror, but less than would otherwise be the case if one reflected on the atrocities sometimes committed in European wars before modern times.

But he

would not go the length of valuing the state of nature above civilization, for after pointing out that the Indians will flee f r o m civilization back to their native woods whenever possible, he continued: 6 8 65

New

and Impartial

66

Ibid.,

p. 43.

67

History

68

Ibid.,

of America,

v o l . ii, p. 145.

Universal

History,

p. 4.

v o l . ii, p. 140, note.

TRANSITION

IN ENGLISH

HISTORICAL

WRITING

L e t us not hence, however, conclude, that the savage state is more congenial to the nature of man, than the civilized; or that he possesses those qualities, either of body or mind, which render him respectable or amiable, in the highest perfection in that state. T h e negro seems to stir as much or more sympathy in Russell's breast; and one picture of a noble A f r i c a n r e f u s i n g to surrender a white guest to a mob of tribesmen, enraged at a slave raid, suggests the Noble S a v a g e motif.m

" Before

y o u can get at h i m , " cries the N e g r o , " you shall pass over m y body.

O my f r i e n d s ! W h a t just man would ever enter

m y doors, if I should suffer my habitation to be stained with the blood of an innocent person? " M o r e definite yet is the History

of the American

Indians

( 1 7 7 5 ) by James A d a i r , a trader long resident a m o n g the Indians.

T h e most obvious feature of his book is its long

series of a r g u m e n t s — o c c u p y i n g nearly two-thirds of the text — t o prove that the N o r t h A m e r i c a n natives were descended f r o m the Jews.

T h i s has no value except to suggest that

A d a i r was not the most critical of writers.

But it is signi-

ficant to find him using the device of Montesquieu's Letters

Persian

by making the Indians criticise the overrefinement,

the snobbishness towards the lower classes, the legal involvements, and other features o f European civilization. 7 0

Other-

wise, however, he shows no special enthusiasm for the people w h o m he was supposed to k n o w so well. T h e Seven Y e a r s ' W a r marks a quickening of English interest in the Orient. 7 1

T h i s found immediate expression in

"9 Ibid., vol. i, p. 577. 70 History of the American Indians (London, 1775), pp. 431-448. Three long quotations f r o m A d a i r may be found in B. Bissell, T/ic American Indian in English Literature of the Eighteenth Century ( Y a l e Studies in English, no. lxviii, N e w Haven, 1925), pp. 72-73, a w o r k that has some discussion of the Indian in historical writing. 71

M a r t h a Pike Conant, The Oriental

Talc in England

in the

Eighteenth

PRIM1TIVISM

125

the works of Robert Orme, but only in a restricted way, for Orme was rather the historian of British expansion, of the feats of British arms, than a student or interpreter of the rich culture of the East. Like Thucydides, with whom on other grounds he has been compared, 72 he turned aside from the great panorama of civilization to trace the course of military fortunes during a short, though important, period. His first work dealt with the History of the Military Transactions of the British Nation in Indostan from 1745 ( 1 7 6 3 - 1 7 7 8 ) , while his second was entitled Historical Fragments of the Mogul Empire, of the Morattocs, and of the English Concerns in Indostan from the Year MDCLIX (1782). Neither gave much space to anything but politics and war. Y e t the earlier one had gone through five editions before 1800, while the Historical Fragments was reprinted in 1805. 7 3 Orme's success was due to his supreme accuracy, his detachment, and attention to detail in style as in matter.7* He was, Professor Elton has remarked, 75 a " masterly painter . . . of single episodes," and at his best when dealing with subjects like the Black Hole. 78 His works were classics of their kind, but he seems to have had little understanding of the larger aspects of history. Moreover he was crippled by inadequate knowledge of the languages of India. Century (Columbia University Studies in Comparative Literature, New York, 1908), pp. 234-235. 7

- O . Elton, Surzry vol. ii, p. 301. 73

of English

Literature,

J730-1780

(London, 1928),

For a list of the editions see the B. M. Catalogue and the D. N. B.

74

Mark Wilks went over some of the same ground and paid high tribute to Orme's accuracy. Historical Sketches of the South of India (London, 1810-1817), vol. i, p. 335, note. 75 70

Loc. cit.

R . Orme, A History of the Military Transactions of the British Nation in Indostan from the Year MDCCXLV (London, 1778), vol. ii, PP. 74-77•

126

TRANSITION

IN ENGLISH

HISTORICAL

WRITING

The last quarter of the eighteenth century saw a great advance in Oriental studies through the labors of such men as Sir William Jones, Henry Thomas Colebrooke, Sir Charles Wilkins and others. But it was not until later that historians were much influenced by these trends. It has been thought significant, however, that Robertson in his last work showed sympathy with the lot of the Hindus. 77 Mention should be made also of Charles Hamilton, author of Historical Relation of the Origin, Progress and Final Dissolution of the Government of the Rohilla Afghans in the Northern Provinces of Hindostán ( 1 7 8 7 or 1788). This work was based mainly on a Persian manuscript, but included other original sources. Accurate and well-written, it marked an advance in knowledge of its subject.78 Another writer, Thomas Maurice, though not an outstanding scholar, was one of the first to present Indian culture to the general English reader in a favorable light. 79 77

Elton, op. cit., vol. ii, p. 281.

78

R. Sencourt, India in English

79

Literature

(London, 1923), pp. 233-234.

Thomas Maurice was author of several works including before 1800 Indian Antiquities (7 vols., London, 1793-1800), History of Hindostán (2 vols., London, 1795-8). They strike a modern reader as very dull and prosy and not calculated to popularize their subject-matter. Maurice did not know the languages of Asia, Indian Antiquities, vol. i, p. 55.

CHAPTER

V

S I G N S OF C H A N G E , 1 7 6 0 - 1 8 0 0 : I I , AND

MEDIAEVALISM

PIETISM

PRIMITIVISM was not the only fashion that found early response among historians. E v e n in the decade of Hume's triumph they began to challenge his views of the Middle Ages. A rather striking example of dissent occurs in the preface to the second edition of Charles O'Conor's Dissertations on the Antient History of Ireland (2nd edition, 1 7 6 5 ) published three years after Hume's volumes on the Middle Ages. O'Conor says, with obvious reference to Hume, that " the Idea lately propagated, that the Records of these Northern Countries, before the Resurrection of Letters in the Sixteenth Century, are not worthy of Attention, cannot be supported. It is a Strain of Affectation, and one of those Paradoxes, which, by degrading the Judgments of a great Genius, keeps inferior Abilities in Countenance." 1 But the earliest extensive criticism of Hume's views occurs in L o r d Lyttelton's History of the Life of King Henry the Second ( 1 7 6 7 - 1 7 7 1 ) . T h e first of the four large volumes of this work comprised an introduction on the chief " revolutions " f r o m 1066 to the accession of Stephen and a closer study of Stephen's reign itself. In the next volume Lyttelton passed to social and economic conditions in H e n r y I I ' s reign and to a long discussion of the relations of church and state. H e included in his survey the manners of the English and Welsh, the military and naval art of the time, social 1 Dissertations 1 7 6 5 ) , p. xviii.

on the Antient

History

of

Ireland

(2nd ed., Dublin, 127

I 2

8

TRANSITION

IN ENGLISH

HISTORICAL

WRITING

classes, laws, feudalism, government, chivalry, and some account of learning.

T h e third volume comprised a narrative

o f the Conquest of Ireland and the general history of H e n r y ' s reign.

A large part of the first volume, 2 and all of the last

consisted of notes and appendices.

Lyttelton reported that

his hardest labor w a s put into the account o f laws, manners, arts and learning, 3 but he w a s most successful in the detail of political events, and perhaps least successful, as w a s customary

in

Memoirs

his

day,

in

dealing

and Correspondence

with

institutions.

His

contains a number of letters

f r o m prominent persons speaking in the highest terms of Lyttelton's achievement; not all of these however were sincere, and his name became legendary for stodgy industry rather than intelligent achievement. 4

Certainly his book is

dull enough, but in its massive a r r a y of i n f o r m a t i o n it had sufficient merit to last f o r years. citing it frequently in his Middle

W e find H a l l a m in 1 8 1 8 Ages, and it is not yet com-

pletely forgotten. 5 In most respects, naturally, Lyttelton w a s a child of the Enlightenment.

H e shared its attitude towards

religion, its dry talk about " philosophy."

medieval

A s early as 1741

he wrote to Pope regretting that Philosophy, Poetry, and ancient and modern H i s t o r y had all been preempted by men like Bolingbroke, W a r b u r t o n , and Pope himself, leaving to Lyttelton nothing but " the rubbish of Monkish Annals " and rude " Gothic ruins " ; 8 - History of the Life vol. i, pp. 433-542. 3 Memoirs ii, P- 574-

of King

and Correspondence

and on another occasion he

Henry

the Second

(London, 1767-1771),

(ed. R . Phillimore, London, 1845), vol.

4 Ibid., vol. ii, pp. 576-579, f o r statements by Horace Walpole, Lord Chesterfield, Bishop Warburton, and others. 5 C. Gross, Sources don, 1915), p. 616. 6

Memoirs

and Literature

and Correspondence,

of English

vol. i, p. 184.

History

(2nd ed., Lon-

MEDIEVALISM

AND

129

PIETISM

sought to explain his choice o f the reign of H e n r y I I as a subject o f history merely by s a y i n g that it offered him an excellent opportunity to expose the errors o f " P o p e r y . "

7

Characteristic is his e f f o r t to find a purely political, rationalistic reason f o r W i l l i a m the Conqueror's action in h a v i n g his expedition blessed by papal sanction, leaving out the possibility that genuine piety m a y h a v e had some share. 8

Yet

there are at least t w o important respects in which Lyttelton separated himself f r o m the general historical standpoint of Hume.

T h e first is in his treatment of the Middle A g e s .

He

was impressed by the vital importance of this period in national history, and, probably w i t h H u m e in mind, protested against those w h o would dismiss it in an epitome.

The life

of H e n r y I I w a s marked, he said, " b y a glory surpassing all military achievements, the r e f o r m a t i o n of government and the establishment o f good laws, and wise institutions, beneficial to the public.

These are objects deserving the attention

of all a g e s ; and they w h o think it best to contract the account of such events into narrow abridgements seem rather to f a v o u r the idleness than consult the instruction, or pleasure, of their readers."

M o r e than this, his account o f feudalism

0

and o f the institution of chivalry w a s distinctly apologetic. H e sought to show that the spirit animating them, so far f r o m being ridiculous, was truly noble. 10 In the second place, Lyttelton's History Gclehrter

is the work o f a

in which f o r m is made subordinate to matter and

accuracy the supreme good.

He

worked

f o r more

than

twenty years b e f o r e publishing a volume and in his zeal for corrections he paid o u t large sums f o r alterations a f t e r the 7

Ibid., vol. i, p. 381.

8

History

9

Ibid., vol. i, p. iv.

10

of Henry

II, vol. i, p. 21.

Ibid., vol. ii, p. 246.

TRANSITION

IX ENGLISH

HISTORICAL

WRITING

proofs were ready. 11 We have seen how large was the space he assigned to notes and supplementary observations; and the text itself sometimes reads like a catalogue. This might be attributed to sheer dullness, 12 but was more probably due to Lyttelton's nervous anxiety to avoid error. He admitted that his book was heavy, but defended himself, by asserting the necessity of being complete and accurate. 13 Hume subordinated research and the inclusion of facts to securing style and " philosophy " ; Lyttelton subordinated style to the inclusion of facts. Only Gibbon possessed industry and genius enough to combine scholarship and style to the fullest degree. Gilbert Stuart was a disciple of Montesquieu and an adherent of the " New History," but he too may most profitably be discussed with the writers under consideration in this chapter. The son of an Edinburgh professor, he became an author at the age of twenty-six with his Historical Dissertation concerning the Antiquity of the English Constitution ( 1 7 6 8 ) . Following this the University of Edinburgh made him a doctor of laws. A s a journalist, Stuart then edited the Edinburgh Magazine and Review during its short existence ( 1 7 7 3 - 1 7 7 6 ) , and his violent attacks on the city celebrities were partly responsible for its failure. He also wrote for the Monthly Review and the English Review.1* He was a man of ability ruined by vanity, violent temper and dissipation. Capable of tremendous exertion on occasion, his frequent debauches made steady work impossible so that his books show only a shallow, if broad, learning. 11

Cambridge

History

of English

Literature,

vol. x, p. 292.

12

See " Lyttelton as a Man of Letters " in A. Dobson, Eighteenth tury Studies (London, n. d.). 13 1

Memoirs

and Correspondence,

Cen-

vol. ii, p. 574.

* There is an interesting account of Stuart in R . Chambers and T. Thomson, Biographical Dictionary of Eminent Scotsmen (London, 1870), vol. iii, pp. 417-420. Disraeli's description of Stuart's quarrels with Henry and Robertson has been referred to earlier. See supra, p. 37-38.

MEDIEVALISM

AS'D

PIETISM

S t u a r t ' s early books were concerned mainly with the institutions of the barbarous and medieval stages of European society. H e protested against the absorption of lawyers in cases and authorities, at the expense of historical background, and of historians in war. 1 5 T w o later works dealt with the modern history of Scotland. I n all there is the same expression of zeal for the New History and for political liberalism. But we may best divide them into two groups according to the idea that dominated each. In the first group he idealized the virtues and the role in European history of the primitive Germans. In his Historical Dissertation he described the ancient Germans and the inhabitants of Britain, and then the land system, social ranks, judicial arrangements, and " Great Council of Parliament " in Germany and E n g land just a f t e r the migrations. All this he compressed into three hundred octavo pages and subordinated to demonstrating Montesquieu's dictum, quoted on the title page, that the constitution of England originated in the German woods. Stuart stressed the excellence of barbarous peoples and the peculiar virtues and liberty of the Germans. H e claimed that the Saxons almost exterminated the earlier inhabitants of Britain at the time of their conquest and that the modern English political system was therefore the closest model of the ancient German order that could be found in modern times, 1 " an idea which was to become very popular among English writers of the next century. The cavalier fashion in which Stuart handled historical evidence when he wished to reach a certain conclusion deserves attention. Here, for example, is his proof that there 15 A View of Society in Europe, in its Progress from Rudeness to Refinement ( E d i n b u r g h , 1 7 7 8 ) , " A d v e r t i s e m e n t " and p. 345, n o t e ; Historical Dissertation concerning the Antiquity of the English Constitution ( E d i n b u r g h , 1 7 6 8 ) , pp. iii-iv. 16 Historical 274, 290.

Dissertation,

pp. 58-59, 6 1 , 63 et scq.,

134, 1 5 4 - 1 5 5 , 272-

I 3

2

TRANSITION

IN ENGLISH

HISTORICAL

were Druids a m o n g the Germans.

WRITING

I f the Germans were o f

Celtic origin they " doubtless " followed the religion of their ancestors " in every particular " and would therefore h a v e Druidic priests; if they w e r e not Celts " it may be easily supposed " that R o m a n persecution would oblige the D r u i d s to seek r e f u g e in G e r m a n y , where they would impart their doctrines and establish their a u t h o r i t y ; " it may likewise be imagined " that German mercenaries in the armies of Gaul brought back Celtic religious practices and attendant priests. But, he concluded, the Celtic origin of the Germans is so clearly ascertained that such suppositions are not n e e d e d . " Y e t beyond a general reference to A r r i a n and Strabo, Stuart does not honor us with a sample of the evidence upon which the so clearly ascertained Celtic origin of the German rests. T w o years a f t e r the publication of this Dissertation,

Bishop

P e r c y showed clearly that the Germans were not Celts, but Stuart's essay went through four printings nevertheless and its author won an L L . D . Adulation of the primitive Germans again runs through A Viezv of Society

in Europe

( 1 7 7 8 ) , the burden of which

is that where " Gothic manners " prevailed European institutions were healthy and freedom secure.

Feudalism in its

early, or German, f o r m was a system in which lord and vassal freely cooperated f o r their mutual advantage and in a spirit of mutual help.

W i t h the rise of commerce, however, co-

operation gave w a y to competition, the lord could no longer depend on full and willing assistance f r o m his vassals, and developed compulsory devices like the knight's fee, fixing a certain amount of military service to be due for a given amount of land.

W i t h the old spirit gone, manners and

morals decayed also. 17

Ibid.,

Pelloutier

pp.

187-188,

(Histoire

G e r m a n s and Celts.

dcs

Finally the development of commutanote. Ccltcs,

Historical

Stuart La

seems Haye,

Dissertation,

to

have

1750) p. 49.

followed

Simon

in this c o n f u s i o n of

MEDIEVALISM

AND

PIETISM

133

tion and mercenary soldiers, made possible through the rise of commerce and money, destroyed the feudal military system altogether. O n its ruins was erected royal tyranny buttressed about by a hired soldiery. In England alone the continuing memory of f o r m e r conditions stirred the people to resist tyranny. T h e spirit of liberty in English history was the survival of the spirit of primitive times. 18 Although Stuart was not a great admirer of the Middle Ages, the era in which the virtues of primitive times had succumbed to the vices of commercialism, he was conscious of the desirability of prosecuting their history. Censuring Robertson and other writers for their indifference towards this he draws the " general and humiliating, yet, I hope, not useless conclusion, that the study and knowledge of the dark ages are still in their infancy. Are we for ever to revel in the sweets of ancient lore? And are we never to dig up the riches of the middle times? " 19 In expressing this opinion, Stuart was in part merely criticising Robertson, against whom he had a personal grudge, but his warm account of chivalry, his appreciation of its manners " so lofty and so romantic," prove that there was more than malice in his sentiments. It is interesting, too, in this connection, to find him criticising with vigor the neglect of records as historical sources by his contemporaries. W e may dismiss more briefly the second stage in Stuart's career—that in which he carried on his vendetta against Robertson. H e was accused of taking over the organization which Robertson had devised for historical works and many 18 View of Society, pp. 2, 69, 74-75. 138, 167, 199-200. It is -worth noting that Stuart thought highly of Whitaker (ibid., p. 218), the second edition of whose History of Manchester (see infra) he reviewed with great approval in the Edinburgh Magazine and Review, vol. ii, pp. 488489; vol. iii, pp. 257-260. He mentioned especially Whitaker's criticism of Hume's treatment of the British and Anglo-Saxon periods. 18

View of Society, p. 378.

TRANSITION

IN ENGLISH

HISTORICAL

WRITING

of the facts he had first presented, using them to draw diametrically opposed conclusions. 20 His Obseri'ations concerning the Public Law and the Cotistitutional History of Scotland ( 1 7 7 9 ) , ostensibly a series of the studies of the medieval and modern periods, is really an elaborate onslaught on the learning, the ability, and the style of Robertson. 21 This was followed by the History of the Establishment of the Reformation in Scotland ( 1 7 8 0 ) , containing a short narrative of events and a selection of the records. No attention was paid to society or letters, the very omission for which Robertson is censured in an anonymous pamphlet probably by Stuart. 22 In no respect of research or interpretation is this history distinguished, but so great was the vanity of its author that he probably thought it would, along with the next work to be mentioned, immediately supersede his rival's productions. In the History of Scotland front the Establishment of the Reformation to the death of Queen Mary ( 1 7 8 2 ) Mary is pictured as the innocent victim of circumstances. Some of Stuart's best argument is contained in this book, in which however no one could have any confidence, because its rhetoric and polemic loomed so much larger than its learning. In spite of his discipleship of Montesquieu, Stuart was no more successful than Robertson in rising above the maze of intrigues and disturbance that constituted the subject matter of Scottish history until scholars recently turned their attention to social and economic development. He was always 20 Robertson indignantly pointed this out to the historian Somerville. Thomas Somerville, My Own Life, 1741-1814 (Edinburgh, 1861), pp. 275-276. 21 The " Proofs, Illustrations, and Controversy " occupy most of the book (pp. 147-367) and are largely given up to a criticism of Robertson's views. 22 Critical observations concerning the Scottish Historians Hume, Stuart and Robertson: including an idea of the reit/n of Mary, Queen of Scots. . . (London, 1782).

MEDIEVALISM

AND

PIETISM

135

more apt at abusing better men than improving on their work. He was unwilling to undergo the labor necessary to win fame, and he was embittered that f a m e had not sought him. In dealing with such a character it is not easy to know how sincerely he held the opinions he expressed, how much was merely the result of his vindictive nature. Y e t it is not necessary to enter into the question of motive. W e need only record the fact that here was a younger contemporary of Hume and Robertson who protested against their estimate of the Middle A g e s and showed a more idealizing attitude towards peoples in a primitive state, especially the ancient Germans. 2 3 John Whitaker was a more considerable man than Stuart. His interest in history is said to have been aroused at school where he was especially fond of Bede, " that prince of historians concerning our isle, and that first of religious men born within it," 24 and of Sir Richard Baker's Chronicle of the Kings of England from the Time of the Romans' Government unto the Death of King James ( 1 6 4 3 ) . A f t e r taking his B. A . at O x f o r d , Whitaker became a clergyman, noted f o r piety, and the author of many books of history and antiquities, the best known being his History of Manchester (1771-1775). Originally planned to be in four volumes, two on the British, Roman, and Saxon periods, one on the Danish and Norman, and one on the modern, only the first two were published. A survey of the civilization of the A f t e r quoting a rather favorable description of the American Indians, Stuart adds: " S u c h , with a few exceptions, it is to be thought, is the character of all nations in an early age of society." View of Society, p. 157. He constantly treats American Indian, Hindu, and ancient German society comparatively. The frequent references to Adair on America are interesting in view of Adair's point of view. See supra, p. 124. 21

Quot. by J . E. Bailey, John Whitaker, The Historian of Manchester (Manchester, 1877), pp. 5-6. On Whitaker see also supra, p. 114.

X36

TRANSITION

IN ENGLISH

HISTORICAL

WRITING

times, as exemplified by antiquities especially, rather than merely a history of monument of

Manchester

industry,

itself, they constitute a

ingenuity, and

wrongheadedness.

W h i t a k e r ' s style w a s w o r d y and eccentric, his manner insufferably dogmatic.

H e seldom presented a

probability,

being confident that he knew the " true " origin or the " obvious " meaning of nearly everything.

H e was reactionary

in politics and credulous in religion.

H e was apparently

jealous of H u m e , Robertson and Gibbon, all of w h o m he criticized vigorously and occasionally accurately.

O n e of

the misguided group w h o took up weapons against Gibbon, he w a s particularly inept in choosing him as an example of contemporary weaknesses in historical writing, accusing him of misquotation, disregard of evidence, and bad organization. 2 5

Since he could select Gibbon as the object of such

accusations, it is not surprising to find that W h i t a k e r made equally bad mistakes in his treatment of the past. ludicrous to accept the De Situ Britanniae

It was not

as a genuine work

o f R i c h a r d of Cirencester because f o r some strange reason even Gibbon and Robertson were also taken in by this now exploded

forgery. 2 9

There

was

some

excuse,

too,

for

r e g a r d i n g Ossian as authentic when so many great names were aligned on the same side, though W h i t a k e r was ridiculously bigoted in his treatment of those w h o did not agree w i t h him. 27

It is astonishing with w h a t vigour he maintains

25 Gibbon's History of the Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire, volumes iv, v, and vi, quarto, reviewed (London, 1791).

in

2 6 W h i t a k e r said of Richard's b o o k : " That the work is genuine needs no proof. A l l the embodied antiquarians of the fourteenth and the three succeeding centuries could not have forged so learned a detail of Roman antiquities," History of Manchester (London, 1771-75), vol. i, p. 54. But it is now known to be a f o r g e r y . See G. A . Farrer, Literary Forgeries (London, 1907), ch. xi, as cited by E . D. Snyder, in Modern Philology, vol. xvii (1919-1920), p. 181, note 2. 27

T h e poems of Ossian, he said, " carry in themselves sufficient proofs

MEDIEVALISM

AND

PIETISM

137

that the ancient Britons had a parliament and popular liberty and that feudalism was found among them rather than having been introduced at the Norman conquest. 28 B u t at least he was not a f r a i d to defend a new position and \Ve are glad to learn that he was " as positive and stouthearted in real life as in his opinions." 29 N o t even bishops made him quail and only the bogey of the French Revolution could send shivers up and down his back. 30 Although Whitaker ridiculed the imaginative histories being written by the Irish and the Scottish Highlanders, and believed that one should not admire the ancient merely because it is old, 31 he embarked on a considered analysis of Hume as an historian, with special reference to the history of England before 1066. Hume, Whitaker declared, felt it necessary to include some discussion of the Britons and Anglo-Saxons to render his book more complete and therefore more saleable. B u t he lacked a knowledge of the field and was too lazy to acquire it. H e therefore built up a specious philosophical argument f o r shoddy work by condemning the history of early ages as unprofitable. Moreover, Hume was an inaccurate writer in general, paying too much attention to style and philosophical " reflections " at the expense of fact. 3 2 In Whitaker's view, the era before of their own authenticity.... T h e whole body of the Highland Scots are living witnesses of their authenticity." History of Manchester, vol. i, pp. 16-17, note, with reference to Blair's critique on Ossian. 28

History

20

Bailey, op. cit., p. 33.

of Manchester,

vol. i, pp. 251-252, 262-277.

30

See The Real Origin of Govcrntnent (London, 1795), and The Course of Hannibal over the Alps ascertained (2 vols., London, 1794), vol. ii, pp. 102-104, note. 31 The Principal Corrections made in the History of Manchester, Book the First, on republishing it in octavo (London, 1 7 7 3 ) , p. 1 4 7 ; History of Manchester, vol. i, p. 1 6 5 ; supra, p. 114. 32 Principal Corrections, etc., pp. 148-162; History of Manchester, vol. i, p. 464 et seq.; vol. ii, pp. 28-29, 136-138, 179-180, 201-203, 375-404, 437440. 491, 550-570. et passim.

j 38

TRANSITION

IN ENGLISH

HISTORICAL

WRITING

1066 was " the great seed plot of our national history," and " the most important and momentous in our annals." 33 T h e ancient Britons, he says, made great progress in civilization long before the R o m a n s came, but their arrival carried on the process until Britain became one of the most advanced provinces in the Empire. S o f a r from being degenerate, its inhabitants had fought valiantly against the Roman armies, although their vigor undoubtedly slackened during the long peace of the imperial rule. But they rose again to new heights of heroism a f t e r the departure of the legions, a period, Whitaker declared, in which British genius was displayed as brilliantly as at any time in history. 34 But there followed a lapse into vice until the S a x o n s came as the avenging agents of Heaven. Their invasions and those of the Danes threw back the civilization of the island so badly that it was not until the fifteenth or sixteenth centuries that complete recovery was made. B u t the blood and the influence of the ancient Britons, so f a r f r o m being extirpated by the Saxon conquest, had persisted through all vicissitudes to modern times. 35 T h u s Whitaker throws emphasis in his view of English history upon the most ancient period. Moreover, to him something of romantic glamour attached itself to these dim origins, a point which can be best illustrated by a quotation. He has been speaking of the forests of British times which must have covered the site of modern Manchester. And all along the present streets, instead of the cheerful voice of industry or the numerous retainers of commerce, must have then existed the gloom of forests and the silence of solitude. So circumstanced must have then been the whole busy circuit of the present town, the solitude and silence being never interrupted but by the numerous resort of soldiers to the fortress in war, 33

Principal

34

Ibid., vol. ii, p. 1 1 .

Corrections,

p. 1 4 9 ; History of Manchester,

Ibid., esp. vol. ii, pp. 6-7.

vol. i, p. vii.

MEDIEVALISM

AND

PIETISM

139

by the occasional visits of hunters in peace, and by the hollow hum, the dying murmurs of the garrison conversing at distance in the Castle-field. And a mind tolerably romantic might long amuse itself with the reflection, that the boar and the wolf, then (as will after appear) the inhabitants of this gloomy region, were for the most part the only proprietors of these ample confines, or that they slumbered perhaps in security by day on the well-wooded bank of the present church-yard, and roamed perhaps in companies by night over the well-wooded area of the present market-place. 38 Along with this went a certain sense of the power of tradition in history. H e explained the rise of the medieval papacy by the continuing "ambitious p r i d e " of the R o m a n character. " Under every f o r m of their government and in every change of their manners, this remains the unvarying lineament of their minds." 37 It created the R o m a n Empire and when that Empire fell, when military conquest was no longer possible, it was transmuted into a spiritual imperialism. " The descendants of the world's conquerors inherited the spirit of their father's patriotism; and new Mariuses, new Sullas, and new Caesars in ambition lay disguised under the tonsure of the monk, the red hat of the cardinal, or the purple pall of the prelate." 3S The prerogatives of the Roman see were asserted in every land as once the legions had borne the standards of Rome throughout the world. This theory of the growth of the papacy rises above the notion of the successive ambitions of individual men to grasp the force of tradition and of corporate spirit. It belongs to a new mode of thinking. So, too, does Whitaker's comparison of the ancient Gauls and the modern French in which 3U

Ibid., vol. i, p. 27.

37

Ibid., vol. ii, p. 475.

38 Ibid., A sense f o r the continuity of history appears also in vol. ii, pp. 493-497. H e attributed the tendency of the people of Manchester to drunkenness to " our German origin " . Ibid., vol. ii, p. 225.

I40

TRANSITION

IN ENGLISH

HISTORICAL

WRITING

he finds that an identical spirit o f ferocity and love of conquest has characterized French history since R o m a n times. 39 Finally, W h i t a k e r is distinctive for the greater emphasis he puts on the hand of God in history.

Robertson was dis-

tinguished f r o m H u m e and Gibbon by his belief in Christianity, but W h i t a k e r belongs to the new piety as Robertson did not.

E v e n when accused of being a Methodist he replied that

although a loyal son of the Establishment the name Methodist did not seem dishonorable to him.

H i s t o r y was for him a

process constantly guided by a Superintending Providence. A people's vices produce their calamities; these calamities recall to virtue and religion which reinvigorate the social f r a m e until corruption again creeps in and the cycle begins anew.

O v e r all G o d presides, guiding the destinies of the

w o r l d with steady, omnipresent hand so that one people becomes the agent of another's destiny and is subject to its own. 4 0

T h e strongly religious view o f

history had been

under a cloud while the Rationalists had their day.

A s the

revolt against the eighteenth century became stronger piety became more common again. M o s t of the books already mentioned in this chapter were published before 1780 and show how early was the challenge of new interests and new conceptions of history.

I f ration-

alistic historiography was the o r t h o d o x y of the mid-eighteenth century, there was beneath the surface a strong current of heretical opinions, a phenomenon which indeed seems to be characteristic of A g e s of Faith. Naturally enough these new opinions found more clear-cut expression as the century neared its close.

One of the best

instances is the w o r k o f John Pinkerton, a man of no mean talents, w h o would have ranked high in the record of scholarship, had it not been for his faults o f character and the 38

The Course of Hannibal,

40

E . g., History

vol. ii, pp. 100-102.

of Manchester,

vol. i, pp. 460-461; vol. ii, p. 497 et seq.

MEDIEVALISM

AND

PIETISM

141

fate that robbed him of the advantages of station and thorough education. H e had a love of knowledge, industry, and considerable intelligence. B u t all of his work suffered from grave defects, if only because he wrote f o r a living and therefore hastily and on many subjects. Pinkerton's father lacked either means or desire to give his son a university education; he apprenticed him to an attorney in Edinburgh instead. Leaving this to seek literary f a m e in London, Pinkerton never quite made a success although he enjoyed the correspondence and acquaintance of some outstanding figures. He was constantly driven to formulate new schemes to make money. Never a very reliable person, he indulged in literary forgery on at least one occasion, and his sexual aberrations led to separation f r o m his w i f e . H e quarreled with his publishers, his literary associates, and worst of all his bankers. He shared much of the irascibility and vindictiveness of Ritson, something too of his learning; although unlike Ritson he grew milder as he grew older. He then expressed regret for his asperities of expression and sought to m o d i f y them in a later edition of at least one of his works. 4 1 This does not seem to have helped his fortune much; the battle went against him and he died in poverty and neglect. 42 Pinkerton early assumed some prominence in the literary revival of the Middle Ages. H e took part in the publication (and the f o r g e r y ) of popular ballads, helped introduce Celtic and Norse literature into England, and shared in a scheme for publishing a complete series of the medieval chroniclers. Ritson proved, and Pinkerton then admitted, that some of the latter's Select Scottish Ballads ( 1 7 8 3 ) were spurious modern 41 Enquiry into History of Scotland (new ed., Edinburgh, "Advertisement". On Pinkerton see also supra, pp. 114-117.

1814),

" A good deal of information may be derived from The Literary Correspondence of John Pinkerton, Esq., ed. by Dawson Turner (London, 1830).

I 4

2

TRANSITION

IN ENGLISH

HISTORICAL

WRITING

productions. But the Ancient Scottish Poems ( 1 7 8 6 ) , the Vitae Sanctorum Scotiae ( 1 7 8 9 ) , in which Pinkerton sought to imitate Bouquet, 43 and the edition of Barbour's The Bruce ( 1 7 9 0 ) all contained genuine medieval matter. 44 His Essay on Medals ( 1 7 8 4 ) and his Medallic History of England to the Revolution ( 1 7 9 0 ) were pioneer treatises in the field. Pinkerton was also author of a series of works dealing with primitive and medieval history. Of these, we have already mentioned the Dissertation on the Origin and Progress of the Scythians or Goths ( 1 7 8 7 ) . T h i s is of no value now, of course, but it was the most learned and able book of the group to which it belongs. In An Enquiry into the History of Scotland preceding the reign of Malcolm III or the year 1056 ( 1 7 8 9 ) Pinkerton carried his theories further by bringing a tribe of his Goths (the Picts) to Scotland, where they of course conquered the inferior Celts. This treatise was mainly devoted to the problem of the original people of Scotland, but also discussed Irish immigration, contact with the English and Norwegians, and included slight notices of antiquities and ecclesiastical and literary history. It exhibited Pinkerton's customary cocksureness, ingenuity in devising and defending theories, and his anti^Celtic bias. It was a forceful attempt to find a solid foundation for the early history of Scotland, abandoned as hopeless by more cautious men like L o r d Hailes, and was reissued in 1 7 9 4 and 1 8 1 4 . But with the formulation of the science of comparative philology it was superseded by other works. 4 5 In the meantime, however, Pinkerton's activities on behalf of the Goths had caused great annoyance in the 43

Ibid., vol. i, p. 167, note.

41

On Pinkerton's share in the Celtic and Norse revivals see Snyder, op. cit., and Farley, op. cit., passim. 45

See W . F . Skene, Celtic Scotland pp. 13, note, 18-19, 196, note.

(Edinburgh, 1876-1880), vol. i,

MEDIEVALISM

AND

PIETISM

143

48

Highlands. Sir Walter Scott tells us that one group of young men were too wise to be angry and rather burlesqued the whole controversy by organizing themselves into a club named " The Mighty Goths." 4 7 A better fate awaited the History of Scotland from the accession of the house of Stuart to that of Mary ( 1 7 9 7 ) , covering the years 1 3 7 1 to 1542. Pinkerton realized that the whole dynasty of the Stuarts had suffered in reputation from the misdeeds of its last representatives and that the earlier period needed to be rewritten from the original documents. T o a large extent he was successful in doing this so far as political history was concerned, his primary aim, and the book may be said to have usefulness even now. This is mainly because of the documents quoted in illustration of the text or given at length in the appendices, but reference is sometimes made to other points.48 All that Pinkerton had to say on non-political matters, he compressed into three short " retrospects " after the manner of Hume's chapter on " Manners and Arts." 49 In Pinkerton we see a clear instance of zeal for medieval poetry accompanied and succeeded by an effort to stimulate interest in the national history, " the neglect of which," he said,50 " cannot be too much regretted." Moreover he concerned himself with the early and medieval periods in particular. It is of some interest to see how his efforts were looked upon by others in this age of nascent Romanticism. 40

Literary

47

Sir Walter Scott in Quarterly Review,

Correspondence,

vol. i, pp. 236-237. vol. xli (London, 1829), p. 133.

48

Hume Brown, History of Scotland (Cambridge, 1 9 1 1 ) , vol. i, p. 232, ct passim. Hallam called Pinkerton " a very well-informed historian." Constitutional History of England (London, 1846), vol. ii, p. 470, note. 49

History of Scotland vol. ii, pp. 386-435. 50

Literary

(London, 1797), vol. i, pp. 143-185, 388-440;

Correspondence,

vol. i, p. 215.

I 4 4

TRANSITION

IN ENGLISH

HISTORICAL

WRITING

Samuel Knight, author of Elegies and Sonnets ( 1 7 8 5 ) , lamented his abandonment of " the bright and flowery paths of poetry, to wander among the dark and barren deserts of early history," 51 but James Johnstone, author of the Antiquitates Celto-Normanciae, was more encouraging as one might expect from his interests. " It gives me extreme satisfaction," he wrote to Pinkerton, " to observe that a gentleman of your erudition has deigned to cast a pitying look upon the scanty and vanishing remains of Scottish history. Between Monkish credulity and refined superficiality they have hitherto been sadly mangled." 52 According to Pinkerton, also, his works were praised by Gibbon, Sir William Jones, James Rennell and Bishop P e r c y ; 5 3 while Turner spoke of him with respect.54 But the most interesting expression of opinion came from Horace Walpole, the high priest of Gothic and the herald of Romanticism. When he heard of Pinkerton's projects he owned himself " not overjoyed at wading into the history of dark ages. . . . In general, I have seldom wasted time on the origin of nations; unless for an opportunity of smiling at the gravity of the author, or at the absurdity of the manners of those ages; for absurdity and knavery compose almost all the anecdotes we have of them, except the accounts of what they never did, nor thought of doing." 5 5 A little later he admitted he was " totally unversed in the story of original nations " and " little interested in the savage manners unassisted by individual character," and flatly told Pinkerton " I confess I do not care a straw about your subjects, with whom 51

Ibid., vol. i, p. 100.

52

Ibid., vol. i, p. 118.

53

Ibid., vol. i, p. 3 5 1 .

54

Sharon Turner, History vol. i, p. 20, note 40. 55

Literary

Correspondence,

of the Anglo-Saxons vol. i, pp. 90-91.

(London, 1799-1805),

MEDIEVALISM

AND

PIETISM

145

I am no more acquainted than with the ancient inhabitants of Otaheite." 56 Often indeed Pinkerton himself speaks disrespectfully enough of the subjects with which he had to deal, as we found to be the case with Macpherson, too. In spite of his adulation of the Goths he declared that the " paradoxical philosophy which supposes man more happy in a savage, than in a civilized condition, will never find converts among the sons of science," but is a mere dream of poets." He was no great admirer of the " barbarous " Middle Ages, though he recognized that progress was being made then, and that the arts had reached a high point.58 He showed his kinship with the eighteenth century also in his desire for pragmatic learning, deploring the fact that while many studies had been made in the progress of society from rudeness to refinement, none had yet been made on how to produce this progress ourselves, consciously and rapidly; 5 9 while in one of his earliest and most hopeful books he outlines a scheme for a " Social Science " which was so badly needed.60 Yet in many respects his outlook was that of the nineteenth century. This is perhaps most clear in his protest against " philosophical " history, with its superficial information and superabundant theorizing. " History is a science, and must like other sciences, have rules peculiar to it; " and only by due observances of them can reliability be secured. 61 Of fundamental importance it was that when Pinkerton talked about ra

' Ibid., vol. i, p. 223. He wrote on another occasion: " I never did taste or study the ancient historians of nations." Ibid., vol. i, p. 225. 57

History

58

Ibid., vol. i, pp. 94, 1 7 1 , 177, 350.

59

Ibid., vol. i, p. 339.

of Scotland,

vol. ii, pp. 386-387.

60

Letters of Literature (London, 1785), published under the pseudonym Robert Heron, Letter xlvii, et passim. 81

Enquiry

into the History

of Scotland,

vol. i, pp. x x i v - x x v .

I 4

6

TRANSITION

IN ENGLISH

HISTORICAL

WRITING

the rules of the science o f history he concerned himself with the mode of securing facts, rather than with questions o f interpretation. His first rule is that history is to be regarded as true only when based directly on original authorities. Absence of evidence is to be equivalent to non-existence, no matter to what plausible conclusions about a supposed event theory might be able to bring us.62 The historian must not attempt to go behind his authorities which are for him " facts " — a curious failure to recognize the possibilities of criticism of texts. Historical events, also, are governed by chance, not laws, and each event must therefore be regarded as a separate entity, to be treated solely in the light of its own evidence. The historian will prefer inconsistencies in his narrative to system produced by ignoring or manipulating the sources. 63 He will, of course, consider each age solely in the light of its own conditions and ideas. " No error can be more fatal to the balance of historical truth than the estimation of ancient times by modern ideas." 64 Another striking feature in Pinkerton is the manner and extent of his rebellion against the stress customarily laid on style. He had not only minimised the artistic, but made style a positive detriment to the historian, possibly because he himself had few literary gifts. " Seldom or never are elegance and exactness united." 85 On the contrary the historian must be a pedant, for " tho pedantry be contemptible because useless, in natural and moral philosophy, poetry, and other departments of genius, and science, yet in history it is even laudable, if it be not digressive. For history resting entirely on facts, and authorities, it must have many references and quotations; which, in any other science, form the 62

Ibid., vol. i, p. 107.

63

History

of Scotland,

vol. i, pp. 302, 338.

" Ibid., vol. i, pp. 339-341. 65

Ibid., vol. ii, p. 183, note 2.

MEDIEVALISM

AND

PIETISM

147

essence of pedantic erudition." 86 Pinkerton was also emphatic on the necessity of using more than purely literary sources. This was especially so in the case of medals, and of public records for which he several times urged governmental supervision. 67 An industrious worker himself, a pioneer in little traveled paths, Pinkerton was acutely aware of the steps necessary to improve the condition of historical studies. Thus we have come a long way from the ideas of Hume. Nor is Pinkerton to be explained merely by the effect of the literary revival in England on history. He himself claimed to have been inspired by French, German and Scandinavian students, rather than by the British tradition, and he condemned the insularity of his countrymen. He pointed out that Scottish writers were often ignorant of the best work through neglecting the study of bibliography, carried to a great height abroad. Thereby they destroyed much of their own usefulness. 63 In many respects a survivor of the old line of cocksure, truculent antiquarians, in other respects Pinkerton approximates closely the scholarly ideals and interests that were to dominate a large part of the next century. Pinkerton was one of the leaders among the lesser historians who bridged the gap between the Great Triumvirate and 66

Enquiry

into the History

6

of Scotland,

vol. i, pp. vii-viii.

" " N a y the philosopher who writes, or peruses history, for that greatest of purposes, the knowledge of human manners, will learn more from medals than from the best histories.'' Letters of Literature, p. 336. " A s the importance of national records is extreme, there ought to be in every country a literary inspector of records, independent of the juridical arrangement, to attend to the preservation of the more ancient, and publish curious extracts." History of Scotland, vol. i, p. 507, note. Compare the Gibbon-Pinkerton scheme for publication of sources treated below in chapter x. In the Introduction to the Enquiry (p. xlviii) Pinkerton suggested a collection of the best manuscript treatises on Scottish antiquities and of the rarest of those already in print. Thus he had a very modern appreciation of the needs of historical study. 88

Enquiry,

vol. i, p. vii.

I48

TRANSITION

IN ENGLISH

HISTORICAL

WRITING

Hallam. But the new outlook was not confined to those of equal rank with him. It may be found, in some of its aspects, quite clearly expressed in such a writer as Robert Heron whose History of Scotland ( i 794-1799) is not otherwise of any consequence. The son of a poor weaver, Heron was misguided enough to attempt to make a living by his pen. Without talents of a high order, not very industrious, improvident and incurably procrastinating, he was several times imprisoned for debt.89 On one of these occasions a friendly bookseller suggested that he undertake to write a History of Scotland as a means towards release. Books were brought to the prison and a whole volume is said to have been completed there.70 But the sources of good history are not so easily transferable, nor was Heron the man to use them carefully if they had been. Little good can be said of his scholarship except that he recognized his own defects and with engaging frankness prefaced his History with what amounts to a not very favorable review. One important fact he did not mention was that he was paid by the sheet, which may explain why he wrote to the extent of six octavo volumes. Heron accepted the current idea of history as illustrating a progress from " rudeness to refinement" and sought to apply this concept to the history of Scotland on the theory that the growth of civilization could be better shown in the history of one country than in that of society as a whole, an argument perhaps reflecting an increased consciousness of the element of nationality. 71 Moreover, in spite of his own scanty scholarship, he certainly expressed- a rather advanced sense of historical criticism among the popular writers 69

There is an excellent little essay on Heron in H. G. Graham, Literary and Historical Essays (London, 1908), pp. 161-169. 70

D: N. B., art. " Robert Heron."

71

History of Scotland (1794-1799), vol. i, pp. xxvii-xxviii.

MEDIEVALISM

AND

PIETISM

of his day. Industrious reading is not enough. sary a l s o : 7 2

149 I t is neces-

to study diligently the sense of each successive passage in those records which afford the foundation of our narrative; to compare the different contemporary writings, sentence by sentence, and thought by thought, with one another; to estimate the credibility of the various original authors, by a careful consideration of consistency of narrative;—and opportunities of information, —freedom from the causes of prejudice, or subjection to them— discernment, or the want of it,—sobriety of judgment and faithful integrity of character, or a flightiness of imagination prone to embellish with fiction, and a looseness of morality, not reverencing the distinction between truth and falsehood. . . . [It is necessary] in the composition of an historical work, from the evidence of ancient chronicles, epistles, laws, and charters,—to judge of the value of your evidence—by looking into first principles of human character,—by considering whether the acknowledged talents, accomplishments, passaons, and habits, of this or that man, give probability to what is related of him by examining whether the state of the general spirit, intelligence, and manners of a nation, were consistent with the account which we receive of this or that public transaction—by applying the philosophy of the Law of Nature and Nations to the illustration of historical truth. . . . Finally, Heron is another instance of protest against the neglect of the history of " barbarous " ages by Bolingbroke, H u m e and Robertson, pointing out that these men were mainly interested in illuminating the political system of modern times and (nice t h r u s t ! ) that they were too lazy for " the rugged toil of antiquarian research." 73 Then by a curious concatenation of witnesses, he r e f e r s to Herodotus, Gibbon, and Epic Poetry as proof that " barbarous " ages 72

Ibid., vol. iii, pp. vi-vii.

73

Ibid., vol. i, p. 31.

j5o

TRANSITION

IN ENGLISH

HISTORICAL

WRITING

are really susceptible of literary treatment and that it is possible to separate fact f r o m fable in their study. P o o r H e r o n ' s achievements were not equal to the merits» of his ideas o f study.

H e divided his history into books,

each book into t w o sections, one on public affairs and one on social life.

B u t though he had given a vigorous criticism o f

those w h o confined their attention to political history

74

the

sections on social life are never elaborate, not as concrete or as interesting as those of H e n r y , and g r o w shorter volume to volume.

from

T h e book is badly padded, the facts in-

sulated with a thick coat of speculation, all couched in an ambitious verbose style.

I cannot resist one quotation in

illustration of this point.

H a v i n g introduced the invention

o f gunpowder with a brief mention of R o g e r Bacon and the German S c h w a r t z , H e r o n embarks on a long disquisition on the effects of firearms on civilization, beginning: " t h e uplifted arm, the clenched fist, a stone taken f r o m the earth, a branch torn f r o m a tree were the first weapons of offense, used a m o n g mankind."

75

It is not surprising that a book

with so many weaknesses should not be successful, but one hopes H e r o n paid his debts f r o m it.

I f he did, the relief

was only temporary, f o r the hour of death found him in the debtors' prison at N e w g a t e . Another minor example of protest against " philosophical " history is Charles H o m e ' s New Chronological of the History

of England

(1791).

Arbridgment

T h i s was the veriest

o f compilations intended f o r popular consumption.

Its or-

ganization w a s purely annalistic, the book being divided into reigns and then subdivided into years.

Great admiration f o r

Henault was expressed by its author.

Home divided history

into t w o types: chronological and systematic, the latter characterized by the tracing of events back to their causes and 74

Ibid.,

vol. i, pp. 61-62.

75

Ibid.,

vol. iii, p. 245.

MEDIEVALISM

AND

PIETISM

forward to their furthest consequences.

T h i s type, H o m e

admitted, required more labor and intellect, and was more interesting and instructive, than chronological history. But then is not the [reader] exposed at every step to become the dupe of the writer's prejudices, in addition to his own, and of being misled by his too subtile refinement, which as often misleads mankind as does stupid ignorance? T o what other cause, but to the prejudices of historians, is it owing that, instead of a faithful, unclouded mirror of the past events of this country, we have Whig histories of England, and T o r y histories, Church of England histories, Calvinistical histories, and Roman Catholic histories ? It is evident, likewise, that ingenious men, by too deep and refined speculations on causes and events, often overshoot the mark, and mislead others as well as deceive themselves. Hence they frequently make facts bend to theories, instead of deducing theories from facts; in their eyes every movement in the political world forms part of that intricate system, which, perhaps, was first called into existence in their own closets; and they hardly know how to make any allowance for the caprice, the inconsistency, and the folly, to which we know the great are fully as subject, as persons in inferior stations. T h e philosophical dissertations on history that are now frequently published may claim a superiority over the plain chronological narrations of our ancestors; but certainly they are much less entitled to the name of histories, and are by no means so well calculated for general use; which requires a simple and contracted form at once for the advantage of common understandings and of narrow finances." One o f those who replied to Lyttelton's Protestant view o f the investiture struggle as Lyttelton had criticized H u m e ' s casual treatment o f H e n r y I I ' s reign, was Joseph Berington. T h i s Catholic priest devoted his long life chiefly t o vigorous agitation f o r civil and religious freedom, but he found time 76 C. Home, New Chronological land (London, 1 7 9 1 ) , pp. v-vii.

Abridgment

of the History of

Eng-

152

TRANSITION

IN ENGLISH

HISTORICAL

WRITING

also to publish several compilations of an historical character. O f these, two in particular deserve our attention here—the History of the Lives of Abeillard and Heloisa (1784) in the second edition ( 1 7 9 3 ) , containing an introduction on the eleventh century, and the History of the Reign of Henry the Second, and of Richard and John, his Sons . . . ( 1 7 9 0 ) . In the latter work Berington professed a desire to write directly from contemporary chronicles, 77 but he had so little conception of real scholarship as to apologize in his Abeillard and Heloisa for the paucity of his reading by saying that to have read more would have been confusing rather than enlightening. 78 From the research standpoint his greatest service is contained in his publication of materials on the history of Roman Catholicism in England. 1 9 His more pretentious books do, however, exhibit the ideas of an advanced Catholic on the Middle Ages. Berington was certainly no panegyrist of the medieval church. He held it an undoubted evil for criminous clerks to be outside the jurisdiction of the secular courts and censured, though not without qualification, Innocent III for worldliness and undue ambition. 80 For the Albigensian Crusade, he had little but bitter denunciation—worldly motives and religious intolerance combined to produce it, and its only heroes were the martyred Albigensians. 81 But he sought to prove that the Catholic centuries of English history, whatever their faults, had been unfairly represented. " Their 77History p. xviii. 78

History

of the Reign

of Henry

the Second...

of Abeillard

and Heloisa

(Birmingham, 1790),

(2nd ed., London, 1793), vol. i,

p. vi. J. Berington, The Memoirs of G. Panzani... Translated from the Italian original. ..to which are added an introduction and supplement. (London, I793-) 79

80

History

81

Ibid., pp. 5I5-527-

of the Reign

of Henry

the Sccond,

pp. 107, 594-595.

MEDIEVALISM

AND

PIETISM

153

ancestors," he said of the proscribed Catholics of his own day, " were the men who once brought glory and freedom to the land; their principles grew with its growing greatness, cementing the political fabric as it rose; and their church was, for ages, its essential and indissoluble partner." 82 In presenting his defence of Becket, Berington applied a standard of judgment in relation to the age that was frequently recommended in the eighteenth century, but less often realized in practice. In their judgment of Becket, he says, the medieval chroniclers were blinded by their enthusiasm for a saint of the church, but modern historians on the other hand have been far too Erastian in their views. They recognize that the Crown had just prerogatives which might be defended honorably. But they fail to see that the church also had rights the defence of which need not be due to " a spirit of pride and priestly domination." 83 Becket may have imbibed somewhat too strong ideas of church prerogative but if so he merely carried a little further than others notions that were as commonplace in his time as the rights of the state in ours. 8 * Unfortunately Berington did not stop at explaining Becket's acts in terms of the spirit of his age but went on to make resistance to the royal prerogative in the name of the church synonymous with resistance in the name of abstract freedom. It is difficult to see that Becket had any such position; an unchallenged church would have been just as dangerous to popular freedom as an absolute king. Berrington tried to make a popular hero out of Becket, declaring that he would have led the barons against John in 1215 and fought against the papal aggressions of Innocent III. Indeed, so much did he overrate Becket that he called him 82

Ibid., p. iv.

83

Ibid., p. 70.

84

Ibid., pp. 235-240.

154

TRANSITION

IN ENGLISH

HISTORICAL

WRITING

the greatest man of the age in Church and S t a t e — " firm, dauntless, composed and m a n l y ; like a deep and majestic river, he proceeds even in his course, hardly ruffled by rocks of opposition, and true to the level he had taken." 85 His faults were the faults of his age, his virtues those that have distinguished great men in all ages. So extreme was this prepossession for Becket and so strong the emphasis on the investiture struggle that Berington missed the real significance of H e n r y ' s reign, the r e f o r m of administration, a mistake the less excusable since Lyttelton had noticed the importance of Henry's reforms. On several occasions Berington expounded the desirability of a sympathetic consideration of the middle ages. H e admitted those ages to be dark, but yet they saw progress and held lessons even for today, f o r " the mind that divests itself of modern habits and modern prejudices, and goes back with some good temper into the time I have described, will discover virtue that it may imitate, learning that it may admire, maxims that it may copy. T h e man is inequitable who, possessing but one standard, measures by it all the characters and events of other days, and on their correspondence with it pronounces." 88 The same point is made more clearly in the Introduction to the second edition of Abeillard and Heloisa. This is in effect an attempt to explain how the middle ages came into bad repute. The men of the Renaissance, said Berington, despised anyone who did not write classical Latin, while the sixteenth century reformers deepened the picture of medieval depravity in order to j u s t i f y their extreme measures against the Church. Yet in the worst moments of the middle ages the sciences and arts were not extinguished, and f r o m the eleventh century, at least, progress was manifest. O u r diffi85

Ibid., p. 237.

86

Ibid., pp. 645-646.

MEDIEVALISM

AND

PIETISM

155

culty is to catch the angle from which the men of past ages saw life. In the eleventh century there was a group of rulers, wise, able and good, such as no era has surpassed. But the same men were superstitious, and credulous even to the extent o f miracle-mongering. W e can comprehend these two sides only by seeing history in long perspective. Could we transport ourselves back to their times, and seize the association of ideas which had occupied their minds, we might discover how they saw and reasoned. It was the natural effects of circumstances, which then no superior sense or better organization could have surmounted. Man is a part of the general system which time rolls on, and is subject to its laws. They were as wise as they could be; and if we are wiser, it is because a new order of things has risen to our view. The time will arrive when this age may be denominated dark; and who knows, but they may say, we were credulous? Our Ancestors, I doubt not, thought themselves as little under the influence of prejudice and idle fancy, as we deem ourselves; and to speak equitably, agreeably to the ideal suggested, can it be said, that they were deceived ? 8 7 In this passage may be found much of the historical approach. It must not be supposed of course that Berington showed any real enthusiasm for the middle ages. His rather jejune appendix on manners, arts and learning in the time of Henry I I praises architecture, but finds sculpture, painting, poetry and music contemptible. 88 He dissents from the degree of approval given medieval literature by " the Historian of our poetry," that is, Warton, though he does praise Ossian and Icelandic poetry. 89 Scholasticism arouses only his scorn. Yet there is always a saving sense of the relativity of historical judgments, a consciousness that posterity of Abeillard

and Heloisa,

vol. i, pp. li-liii.

87

History

88

History of the Reign of Henry II, pp. 603-646.

89

Ibid., pp. 620-621.

j -6

TRANSITION

IN ENGLISH

HISTORICAL

WRITING

might some day look back upon his own age from a superior height and smile at its shortcomings. A more important contribution to medieval studies was made by Samuel Pegge whose Life of Robert Grosseteste ( 1 7 9 3 ) was the first serious attempt at a biography of this important figure. Pegge lacked the imagination and insight necessary for marked success at this task. He compiled available materials, but could not bring the past to life. His high approval of the career of Grosseteste would be more striking if the latter had been less outspoken in his opposition to certain papal actions, nor does Pegge ever speak as freely about the character and significance of the middle ages as some of those we have just mentioned. But that such a book should be written at this time is in itself a mark of change, while its scholarship was such as to constitute a step towards better knowledge of the middle ages. It is perhaps not yet fully superseded.80 A word will suffice for William Warrington's History of Wales ( 1 7 8 6 ) which sought to turn the discoveries of Evans, Mallet, Jones and others to the uses of history. Warrington was a great enthusiast for the Welsh people with " their independency of spirit, defining for ages the rights of nature and of liberty in the bosom of their native mountains." 91 This connection with the Celtic revival is his chief claim to notice today. The emphasis on the " New H i s t o r y " movement was mainly upon the sociological study of history, details not being considered important in themselves but only as they contributed towards a larger synthesis out of which the laws of society might emerge. Of those mentioned in Chapters 0(1

C. Gross, op. cit., gives five references to Pegge. Stevenson, Robert Grosseteste (London, 1899), p. viii. 91

The History 1786), p. v.

of Wales,

in nine books:

See also F. S.

zvith an appendix

(London,

MEDIEVALISM

AND

PIETISM

157

I and II this w a s least true of Robert H e n r y , but this dry, singular clergyman was nevertheless essentially a spirit of the Enlightenment, a worthy member of

the

Edinburgh

Society whose brightest lights were H u m e and Robertson. B u t in Joseph Strutt we see fully illustrated the new " romanticist " approach to what may be called social history, though a better name would perhaps be social antiquities.

H i s inter-

est was never in the arrangement of detail toward philosophical

conclusions.

He

loved the past

for

its o w n

sake,

especially the picturesque details of everyday life, of kings and peasants—dress, manners, arms, games, sports, pastimes, regal costumes—all that gave history its glamour f o r Romanticists like Scott.

Strutt was convinced that the British,

A n g l o - S a x o n , and medieval periods, but especially the first two, had been slighted and that too much stress had been laid on politics and war, while " too little care has been taken in the delineation of the manners and genius of the people."

92

Originally an engraver, he became interested in the content as well as the illustrations of the manuscripts a m o n g which he worked and made his books valuable f o r the information thus obtained as well as for their remarkable illustrations. 03 But he was not an historian in the full sense, f o r he lacked the desire, or at least the ability, to fuse his information into a connected narrative.

N o r did he possess a sense of de-

velopment, although many have been called historians who were lacking in this respect. The Regal and Ecclesiastical Edward the Confessor

Antiquities

to Henry the Eighth

of England

from

( 1 7 7 3 ) was the

first of a series of similar w o r k s ; to it a supplement of twelve plates with accompanying descriptions was added in 1792. 02

The

Chronicle

of England

(London, 1777-1778), vol. i, p. iii.

See Miller Christy, Joseph Strutt, Author, Artist, Engraver, and Antiquary, 1749-1802: A Biography ( 1 9 1 3 ) , in typescript in the British Museum. 03

j58

TRANSITION

IN ENGLISH

HISTORICAL

WRITING

A Complete View of the Manners, Customs, Arms, Habits, etc. of the Inhabitants of England was carried from the Saxon invasion to the reign of Henry the Eighth in two volumes in 1774 and 1 7 7 5 and was continued to date in a third in 1776. The Chronicle of England (1777-1778) treated only of the neglected pre-Norman era and included sketches of civil, military, and ecclesiastical events, as well as material on laws, architecture, agriculture, commerce, and navigation, metal-working, coinage, clothing, arts, learning, the polite arts, and manners in general. A Complete View of the Dress and Habits of the People of England, from the Establishment of the Saxons in Britain to the Present Time ( 1 7 9 6 - 1 7 9 9 ) has been called the most valuable of Strutt's works, 04 but the Sports and Pastimes of the People of England ( 1 8 0 1 ) was easily the most popular and was reprinted as lately as 1903. The former began with an introduction of nearly a hundred pages on the dress of antiquity. It was illustrated with more than 140 very fine colored plates, and contained, in addition to matter more directly suggested by the title, the status of clothiers, sumptuary laws regarding dress, a discussion of the attitude of the clergy, and similar topics.95 To the study of sports and pastimes, Strutt then turned, he says, because the character of a people is better displayed in their amusements than in war or policy. He was also author of an unfinished Dictionary of Engravers ( 1 7 8 5 ) and of an unfinished historical novel, Queenhoo Hall, which was completed by Scott. Strutt, as has been well said by one of his editors, " was a pioneer in almost every branch of English medieval archaeology, and as such is entitled to the respect of every anti84 05

M i l l e r Christy in D. N. B., art. " Joseph S t r u t t . "

Complete Vieiv of the Dress and Habits (London, 1796-99), vol. ii, pt. v, ch. i-iii.

of

the English

People

MEDIEVALISM

AND

PIETISM

159

98

quary." He was in some ways a successor to the social historians of the Enlightenment, but he centered his attention on the picturesque sides of history and on the middle ages. He was a lover of the past rather than a student of historical development. The new piety, apparent to some extent in John Whitaker, found its chief historical expression at this time in the rewriting of Church history from an Evangelical standpoint by the Reverend Joseph Milner and his brother Isaac (History of the Church of Christ, 1794-1809). The first three volumes of the original edition carried the narrative to about the year 1200 and were published between 1794 and 1797. The enterprise was then continued to the Diet of Augsburg in two further volumes by Isaac Milner, who later reedited the whole work. It received some attention during the high-church controversies of the nineteenth century and a new edition appeared in 1847. The idea of the project belonged to Joseph rather than to the younger brother. The former felt that historians, by the attention they devoted to wickedness and the purely secular, institutional side of Christianity, had given a false picture of Church history. He sought to stimulate piety and to fight scepticism by showing that in every age there have been real followers of Christ. He would write a history of good Christians whatever the external allegiance they professed. He criticised 97 " the intemperate censures of writers, who seem to think an indiscriminate aversion to the Church of Rome to be one of the principal excellencies of a protestant historian " and declared,98 " I mean to extol the Church of 96

Sports p. vi. 87 History i, p. 526. 98

and Pastimes

(new edition by Charles Cox, London, 1903),

of the Church of Christ

(2 vols., Philadelphia, 1 8 3 s ) , vol.

Ibid., vol. i, p. 526, note; c f . vol. i, pp. 4, 9 et scq.

K5O

TRANSITION

IN ENGLISH

HISTORICAL

WRITING

Christ, wherever I can find h e r ; nor should a R o m a n dress, w h e n she appears in it, convey a n y prejudice to my mind." T h e History

of the Church

of Christ

was thus a w o r k o f

piety and polemic rather than of scholarship.

T h e Milners

digested the main contemporary printed sources and modern accounts, but made no pretence a t research, at style, or at historical criticism.

" I fairly w a r n the Reader not to expect

f r o m m e , " said Joseph in beginning the enterprise," " any indulgence in the modern taste o f Scepticism.

I shall not

affect to doubt the credibility of ancient respectable historians."

T h e scrappy chapters into which each " century " w a s

divided were vehicles f o r preaching religion rather than conv e y i n g information, nor do they s h o w any signs of special aptitude f o r historical writing.

B u t the success of such a

book w a s certainly a sign of c h a n g i n g taste. 100 N o one w h o examines a large number of the historians between 1760 and 1800, instead of confining himself to the customary three, can fail to be impressed by the multiplying evidences of a new outlook.

T h e r e were important differ-

ences between H u m e , Robertson and Gibbon and below their level an even more clearcut tradition of dissent.

N o r can

there be any doubt that the chief stimulus which produced change in historical w r i t i n g at this time was the " Romantic R e v i v a l " in literature.

T h i s change had gone far by 1800

and the works published a f t e r that date deserve treatment in a separate place.

T h e influence of the Rationalists was still

felt a f t e r 1800 and even beyond the limits of this essay.

But

it was no longer dominant as had formerly been the case. 89

Ibid., vol. i, p. 5.

S. R. Maitland pounced upon the brothers Milner as upon Robertson and Henry. See his Dark Ages, p. 343 et seq., and his two pamphlets, published at London in 1835, A Letter to the Rev. Hugh James Rose with Strictures on Milner's Church History and A Second Letter to the Rev. Hugh James Rose ... containing Notes on Milner's History of the Church in the Fourth Century. 100

C H A P T E R

VI

T H E R I S E OF N A T I O N A L I S T H I S T O R Y

IN the nineteenth century party history tended to merge with nationalist history. A s the former expresses in terms of a picture of the past the doctrines and passions of political parties, so the latter expresses the doctrines and passions of nationalism. It has also been reflected in the choice of subjects, periods of national origin and national glory, and was partly responsible for the extent to which the middle ages, the era in which the national state took shape, were written about in the last hundred years. Even in the eighteenth century, if not earlier, Englishmen showed distinct national consciousness in their attitude toward history. They tended to be less cosmopolitan in their choice of subject than were their contemporaries on the Continent where the national tradition was less old and where there was no such satisfaction with existing arrangements in Church and State as in Hanoverian Britain. 1 Moreover, Hume had a Scottish antipathy for the English, while even Gibbon, if he did not really glory in the name of Briton, was " in his own w a y . . . a proud Englishman, a patriot, with a proper conceit of his country." 2 It is interesting to note also that Bolingbroke, high priest of the cosmopolitan Enlightenment, was a " Philosopher turned Patriot." 3 He beThe contrast between V o l t a i r e and Hume in this respect is pointed out by Fueter, op. cit., p. 367. Robertson and Gibbon were less insular than Hume, but taking eighteenth-century histories as a whole, English writers were not v e r y cosmopolitan in outlook. 1

2

O. Elton, Survey

3

C. J. H . Hayes, " The Philosopher turned P a t r i o t " in Essays

of English

Literature,

1730-1780, vol. ii, p. 287. 161

in In-

! 62

TRANSITION

IN ENGLISH

HISTORICAL

WRITING

lieved that God has planted in human beings the impulses to constitute distinct nationalities. T h e forms o f government should vary according to the spirit of the nationality concerned, while governments once constituted should devote themselves to national rather than class or dynastic interests. Especially should they have a regard for peace and a respect for the rights of other nationalities. F r o m this theory Bolingbroke went on to characterize the national genius of the British and to extol their history. Y e t it is obvious that there is a profound difference between the ideas and emotions o f an eighteenth-century nationalist like Bolingbroke and those of a nineteenth-century figure such as Froude. From the former we have a few scattered ideas and a thin line o f patriotic sentiments, expressed with vigor but seeming incidental to Bolingbroke's main mode o f thinking, perhaps more a weapon of political controversy than anything else. But the case of a Froude is very different. Nationalism suffused the whole cast of his mind, it was part of the essence of his thinking, almost the fons ct origo from which his interpretations of history, his religious adherence, his whole intellectual life took their rise. In the century between these two, consciousness of nationality as a political factor and the expression of patriotic sentiment in historical writing became much more important. O f this development there were many signs in the second half o f the eighteenth century. The interest in race and national origins already touched upon was one of these. Another was the adulation o f the British Constitution by influential foreigners like Rapin Thoyras, 4 Montesquieu, 5 tellectual History Dedicated, to James Harvey Robinson (New York, I929)» PP- 189-206; The Historical Ei'olution of Modern Nationalism (New York, 1931), pp. 17-22. • P a u l de Rapin-Thoyras, L'Histoire 5

Montesquieu, L'Esprit

des Lois

d'Angleterre

(1748), bk. xi.

(1724).

NATIONALIST

HISTORY

and De Lolme. 8 Still a third was the effect upon English opinion of the cession of Corsica to France without reference to Corsican wishes and of the partitions of Poland. 7 T h e Corsican incident, says a recent investigator, 8 " seems to have shocked the public opinion of Europe, a fact in itself significant of a changing attitude," while the importance of the partitions of Poland in the growth of nationalist theory was long since stressed, perhaps even unduly stressed, by L o r d Acton.® A new phase of English nationalism opened with the French Revolution. Burke resented the appeal of its authors and sympathisers to English history. H e contrasted the slow, orderly growth of English liberty with the disorderly excesses across the Channel. Neither in the practice nor in the prevalent opinions of Englishmen could such deeds originate. The Revolution of 1 6 8 8 had been conducted in the most peaceful manner. English progress to freedom had been carried out " under the auspices and is confirmed by the sanctions of religion and piety. T h e whole has emanated from the simplicity of our national character and f r o m a sort of native plainness and directness of understanding " in the English people and their leaders. 10 Burke eulogized the British constitution and social system wherein all classes had place and interests guaranteed by respect for law and custom. English liberty was more certain than elsewhere in Europe because its roots went f a r 6

J . de Lolme, The Constitution of England

(i/75).

7

Burke was the best expression of this public opinion. See Cobban, op. cit., pp. 97-132, and Hayes, Historical Ei'olution of Modern Nationalism, pp. 88-95. 8

Alfred Cobban, op. cit., p. 108.

9

Lord Acton, The History 1907), P- 275 et seq. 10

Reflections 1910), p. 87.

on the French

of Freedom Revolution

and other Essays

(London,

(Everyman edition, London,

164

TRANSITION

IN ENGLISH

HISTORICAL

WRITING

back into the past. T h e English people lived in a security dignified by consciousness of high descent. " A l w a y s acting as if in the presence of canonized forefathers, the spirit of freedom, leading in itself to misrule and excess, is tempered with an a w f u l gravity. . . . B y this means our liberty becomes a noble freedom. It carries an imposing and majestic aspect. It has a pedigree and illustrating ancestors." 1 1 This teaching of Burke marked a new emphasis on national differences in government and history. It helped change the rather smug attitude of Englishmen towards their established institutions into something approximating the modern spirit of jingoism. When the war with France broke out it gradually took on a character different from that of the dynastic struggles preceding the Revolution. Even before 1800 it bore some resemblance to the nationalist crusades of our own times. Such teaching also would naturally lead to doctrines similar to those with which intellectuals have so often rallied the people behind imperialistic adventurers, if they have not actually inspired those adventurers to undertake their mission of carrying civilization to the various " lesser breeds without the law." The new nationalism found an early expression in the fourth volume of a History of the Reign of George III, published between 1783 and 1796. This volume, though not the whole work, was written by Robert Macfarlane and covered the years 1790-1796. Macfarlane finds France the aggressor in her war with Great Britain. 12 He holds the project of universal peace visionary and believes that " a modern Amphictyonic council would prove as ineffectual as the ancient." 13 His argument that the British Empire in 11

Ibid.,

12

History

p . 32. of

the

Reign

p. 376. 13

Ibid.,

v o l . i v , p . 7.

of

George

III

(London,

1783-1796), v o l . iv,

NATIONALIST

HISTORY

i65

India ought to be extended is an interesting anticipation of modern imperialistic notions. India, he says, abounds in military adventurers ready for such an enterprise. The conquest of Bengal has already brought wealth to Britain and prosperity to Bengal. Why then should Britons reject the boon with which Providence tempts them ? Like Alexander and the Romans, ought they not to proceed in their progress of communicating civilization and felicity, toleration and a mild government to their brothers of the human race, who now groan under the pressure of despotism and superstition? Nations can never remain long stationary; and their motion, if not progressive, must be retrograde. Activity prevails through all nature; the principles of attraction and repulsion keep the minutest as well as the largest portions of the universal system in perpetual circulation. Why then should empires be at a stand? Will they not in such a state, like stagnant water, corrupt and putrify? All large communities abound with restless and enterprising spirits, who, if not employed abroad, will be apt to engender mischief at home. Hence arise civil wars, the worst of evils.14 The army, he goes on to say, is indispensable yet needs action to preserve its discipline and spirit. For this reason China acted wisely in recently extending her border to the mouths of the Oxus. Augustus, on the other hand, by his withdrawal of the legions to the Rhine, contributed to the downfall of the Roman Empire. The British Empire must expand to avoid decay. 15 Here, then, in 1796 is the doctrine of the White Man's Burden and the " scientific " argument for imperialism. Macfarlane is also interesting as the author of An Address 14 15

Ibid., vol. iv, p. 113.

Macfarlane sometimes presented other interesting viewpoints such as his argument against the theory that Christianity was responsible for the superior civilization of Europe. Ibid., vol. iv, pp. 4-6.

!66

TRANSITION

IN ENGLISH

HISTORICAL

WRITING

to the People, a pamphlet published in 1797. It is an appeal to the English nation against defeatism at a time when the French were victorious and an invasion of England seemed likely. He called upon every individual to come forward in support of the national cause either on the field of battle or, if age did not permit this, in the realm of opinion. The French were " a nation of hairdressers, cooks and taylors [sic] and devourers of meagre soup " 16 —also, however, " a horde of ferocious banditti " 1 7 —who would prove " impotent against the brawny arms of well-fed Britons." 18 England must take vigorous action on the Continent and ought to stir up the Spanish colonies to rebellion. This would not only secure their independence, but incidentally " a preference if not a monopoly " for British trade. 19 One further example may be given in Herbert Marsh's polemic tract over the origins of the war between England and France. Marsh was an English divine who had studied at Leipzig and who by his translation of J . D. Michaelis' Introduction to the New Testament ( 1 7 9 3 - 1 8 0 1 ) helped to introduce German scientific method into English biblical criticism. In 1799 he published at Leipzig, in German, a book to show by an analysis of the history of the eighteen months between Pillnitz (August, 1 7 9 1 ) and the outbreak of hostilities in February, 1793, that the French were the aggressors in the war with Britain. This was translated into English and published in 1800. 20 Citing the Moniteur and 16 " A n Address to the P e o p l e " in Appendix, (London, 1797), p. 1 1 . 17

Ibid., p. 16.

18

Ibid., p. 9.

™Ibid., 20

Or the Criticks

Criticised

p. 16.

The History of the Politicks of Great Britain and France, from the time of the Conference at Pillnitz, to the declaration of war against Great Britain (London, 1800).

NATIONALIST

HISTORY

167

the speeches and correspondence of leading French statesmen, Marsh sought to convict the national enemy out of their own mouths. H e pointed to the f a c t that the British had not joined in the grouping of Powers against France in 1 7 9 1 , had indeed acted with the greatest friendliness towards the French, f o r example in giving aid against the negro uprising in Santo Domingo. The French, on the other hand, had always been hostile to Great Britain, though a f r a i d to reveal their true spirit until the victories of late 1 7 9 2 . They had been fully armed at sea at least three months before Britain made a move, while their preparation f o r an invasion of Holland was equivalent to hostile action against England because of the close connections between the two countries. Altogether apart from such episodes, he argued, it was clear that war must come since the French leaders were determined to make their revolution international and to overthrow all kings. Possibly Marsh did not make sufficient allowance f o r circumstances in deciding what weight should be given to a particular piece of evidence, by distinguishing between private letters and public speeches f o r instance. H e quotes heated utterances of French leaders calling for war, without considering the domestic political situation that may have played a part in eliciting them. But on the whole, his book is welldocumented, clear-cut, and written with pleasing vigor. It would be entitled to a place in the historiography of the time on these grounds of merit alone. But it is mentioned rather to bring out the fact that there was in the War-Guilt Question of that day as of this an appeal to the aroused public opinion of the nations in arms. A f t e r 1 8 0 0 nationalist feeling and its expression in historiography increased rapidly. T h e publication of S i r Robert Wilson's History of the British Expedition to Egypt in 1 8 0 2 spread anti-French sentiment by spreading the story

168

TRANSITION

IN ENGLISH

HISTORICAL

WRITING

that Napoleon had poisoned the sick at Jaffa. 2 1 When it was seen that Amiens had marked only a truce with the enemy the war took on a more serious aspect. England was felt to be engaged in a life and death struggle. W a r sentiment for the first time became really general. A few years later, the Peninsular W a r was distinctly popular, the Convention of Cintra being greeted by an outburst of nationalist wrath. Wordsworth wrote a pamphlet in which he declared that nationalist uprisings were necessary to defeat Napoleon, and should be stimulated by the Allies, and attempted " to define the moral basis of nationalism, to show that nationality has a mystical justification that makes it the true outward mark o f the general will o f society." 22 Indeed it has been declared that in this pamphlet " patriotism was brought back—to the sentient, the animal, the vital, where it has remained ever since." 23 Thus as England saw with dismay the ascending star of Napoleon, nationalism was both deepened and diffused more widely. 24 F o r the first time it began to rival party feeling as a force in the writing o f history. One of the earliest examples of a rather fully developed nationalist historian, the more suggestive because linked with Burke's propaganda, is Robert Bisset. Bisset was a Scottish teacher who moved 21 Hewson Clarke, An Impartial History of the Naval, Military and Political Events in Europe from the Commencement of the French Revolution (Bungay, Suffolk, 1815), vol. i, p. 554. 22

Crane Brinton, Political Ideas of the English Romanticists 1926), p. 56. 23

21

(Oxford,

Ibid., p. 229.

A very interesting example of transformation from an eighteenthcentury cosmopolitan pacificism to a nineteenth-century nationalism may be found in letters written by Henry (later Lord) Langdale between 1801 and 1805, printed in T. D. Hardy, Memoirs of the Right Honourable Henry Lord Langdale (London, 1852), vol. i, pp. 64, 69-70, 74, 173, 184, 192-194, 195-196, 321, 226-227.

NATIONALIST

HISTORY

169

to L o n d o n and there long conducted a school in Sloane Square.

H e added to his income and expounded his views

by means of several works of history and biography. 2 5

None

of these w a s important f r o m the standpoint of research, but they are admirable reflectors of changing historical attitudes. T h e Sketch of Democracy

( 1 7 9 6 ) professed to r e f u t e the

argument f o r democracy by an appeal to the facts of experience and history.

I t is a polemic against the critics of the

British Constitution, apparently inspired largely by the agitation of B u r k e ' s later days, and nothing could be less historical.

Bisset begins by praising the inductive method as

the one sure road to truth, but in a moment of forgetfulness states that he had adopted his anti-democratic philosophy on the authority of " a gentleman of great eminence " and that " principles first adopted on so respectable authority, subsequent experience and reasoning confirmed."

28

H e would

give " a just view of the badness of democracy and the goodness of the British constitution."

27

H e outlined the horrible

effects of democracy in antiquity, g a v e a f e w pages in summ a r y of its effect in E n g l a n d in the f e w cases (such as J a c k C a d e ' s rebellion) in which he supposed it had appeared there, and concluded with a eulogy of the British

Constitution.

T h e r e is a natural connection, he maintained, between democracy and irreligión, since " those w h o will submit to no human authority, however salutary, come by no very difficult transition to disavow divine,"

28

while as a f o r m of government

democracy is characterized by nearly all the political v i c e s , — turbulence, incompetence, aggression, cruelty to the con23 James Mill said that Bisset made six or seven hundred pounds a year by his writing although he had no genius and little knowledge. A. Bain, James Mill (London, 1882), p. 37, note. 26 27 28

Sketch of Democracy (London, 1796), p. iii. Ibid., loc. cit. Ibid., p. 96.

j jo

TRANSITION

IN ENGLISH

quered, ingratitude.

HISTORICAL

WRITING

I t cherishes the vicious and attacks the

virtuous, perverts the able and corrupts the patriotic.

The

sum of history's teaching, then, is that mixed government is best and " that the happiest o f all lands is T H E LAND W E LIVE IN."

29

T h e same lesson is given by Bisset in his Life Burke

of

Edmund

( 1 7 9 8 ) and in his v e r y poor novel, Douglas,

Highlander

or the

( 1 8 0 0 ) , which w a s ostensibly a picture of the

society of the day especially in the Scottish Highlands.

It

w a s a crude satire, full of bitter, uncharitable propaganda against r e f o r m e r s and supposed revolutionaries. In 1 7 9 6 the Revolution constituted a threat to the established order and aroused Bisset's fear of " democracy," but soon France was under Napoleon and constituted a menace to the greatness, if not the national independence, of Britain. Bisset in his History

of George III, published in 1803, took

up the nationalist cause with ardor equal to, if not greater than, his zeal against democracy. 3 0 aims.

H e f r a n k l y avowed his

In preparing his l i f e o f Burke, he said, he had care-

fully studied recent events, " and with proud pleasure I contemplated the efforts of m y country, displaying in arduous struggles the exhaustless abundance of British resources, and the invincible force of the British character; still more strikingly manifested in the times in which I live, than even those which had immediately or shortly preceded."

Inspired by

31

this and encouraged by the success of his previous works, he had undertaken to narrate the events of the reign of George I I I , prefacing them with an introductory survey of British history to 1760. 29

Ibid., pp. x x i v - x x v ; cf. p. 352.

30

The History

of the Reign

war.—To

ivhich

is prefixed,

England,

in prosperity

and strength,

( L o n d o n , 1803). 31

of George A view

Ibid., vol. i, pp. iv-v.

III to the termination

of the progressive to

the accession

of the late

improvement of

his

of

Majesty

NATIONALIST

HISTORY

171

Both in the Introduction and History, it has been my endeavor to place in a just and striking light the force of the British character, formed and invigorated by the British Constitution; and to demonstrate that Britain either in peace or in war, prospers and conquers, because she excels in wisdom and virtue. This is the moral lesson which my narrative attempts to inculcate; and if I do not succeed the deficiency is in myself, and not in my subject. It is possible that my narrative may be charged with national partiality; I confess I love my country, and hate her enemies; and if this be a crime, I must plead guilty. I trust, however, that notwithstanding my warm affection for Britain, and my admiration of her stupendous efforts, I shall be found, even in reciting the contests with her foes, to have rigidly adhered to historical truth, and done justice to the exertions of her enemies; who, in disciplined valour, genius, and power, far surpassed any foes that were ever opposed to the heroes of ancient Greece or Rome. 32 Bisset's History

was composed at a moment when France

was yet unbeaten and when defeatist sentiment was strong in E n g l a n d .

I t is therefore largely a tract for the times

seeking to j u s t i f y Britain's cause and to arouse British exertions to the point necessary to combat Napoleon.

Bisset

sought to show, in the first place, that England had never been an a g g r e s s o r in the wars she fought, 3 3 that she could not fail to w i n since she was unbeatable at sea, 34 and that in any case it w a s economic folly for any nation to fight Great Britain since her commerce benefited everybody.

History showed

that she had never lost even a battle except against overw h e l m i n g odds, and seldom then. 35

E v e n the w a r of the

A m e r i c a n Revolution, superficially a defeat, had not impaired 32

Ibid., vol. i, pp. vi-vii.

Ibid., vol. i, pp. 151, 174; vol. iii, pp. 33-34, 115, 250; vol. iv, pp. 130131; vol. v, pp. 321, 340; vol. vi, p. 179. 33

34

Ibid., vol. vi, pp. 179, 392-393.

35

Ibid., vol. vi, p. 63, note.

j -j2

TRANSITION

IN ENGLISH

HISTORICAL

WRITING

her power, while it had so weakened her European enemies that revolution came and destroyed them. 36 W h y had Napoleon failed to invade England in 1798? " Bonaparte was aware that Britain contained more formidable opponents than he had ever encountered; the defiles and precipices of the Alps and Apennines, guarded by myriads of Austrians fighting for their masters, could be surmounted; but the plains of Sussex and of Kent, containing hands and hearts of freeborn Englishmen fighting for themselves, would, he well knew, be impassable." 37 England herself afforded no example of a greater naval exploit than the battle of the Nile. " Were Homer to rise from the dead, he would find a subject worthy of his muse in the British sailors and the British officers, headed by the British Nelson." 38 Even without allies, Britain could defeat Napoleon, indeed frequently she had been more successful when fighting alone than when hampered by half-hearted or incompetent aid. 39 Thus did Bisset whistle to keep up the courage of his people. The last part of his History is especially permeated with this doctrine of the invincibility of British arms, and lest anyone should misunderstand its application to the contemporary situation, the lesson is made doubly clear in the final sentences of the book, culminating in a sputter of capitals.40 . . . if she could have been subdued by any human effort, in the late arduous contest she must have fallen: the stupendous exertions that were employed in vain demonstrate her invincible. HERE 36

RESTS OUR

SECURITY,

IN

THE

Ibid., vol. ii, pp. 142-144; vol. iii, p. 403.

37

Ibid., vol. vi, p. 217.

38

Ibid., vol. vi, pp. 223-226.

39

Ibid., vol. iii, pp. 13, 6 1 ; vol. vi, p. 126.

40

Ibid., vol. vi, p. 442.

MANIFESTATION

OF

RE-

NATIONALIST

HISTORY

173

SOURCES NOT TO BE E X H A U S T E D , A SPIRIT NOT TO BE BROKEN, A N D A FORCE NOT TO BE SUBDUED : OUR SECURITY IS I N V U L N E R ABLE W H I L E W E C O N T I N U E W H A T W E H A V E BEEN, AND ARE TRUE TO OURSELVES.

S o generalized a nationalist zeal, combined with the application of history to a specific national crisis, gives Bisset a place in reflecting trends of historical attitude f a r beyond his merits as a scholar o r writer.

H e w a s perhaps the

t h o r o u g h - g o i n g nationalist historian.

first

N o t only did he show

a superheated patriotism, but he frequently employed the characteristic notion o f national character to explain history. O f course this idea he derived f r o m the eighteenth century, but he uses it with a frequency and purpose more common in the next century.

B y it he showed that the British are

adapted f o r liberty, the negro f o r slavery, and the Irish f o r ferocious outbursts, like their seventeenth-century rebellion. 41 But more particularly he w a s interested in the national character of the French. T h e French character, Bisset said, was distinguished by courage, activity, ingenuity, levity, love of pleasure and instability.

F o r a l o n g time the F r e n c h people supported ab-

solutism and the R o m a n Catholic religion with extreme loyalty.

B u t w h e n these showed

signs of decay and

were

subject to biting criticism, the unstable French went to the other extreme.

It became fashionable to attack the church

and Christianity.

" Gallic ingenuity could easily find argu-

ments to expose the frivolity and folly of many of their priestly doctrines, rites, observances; but as ardent as versatile, leaving their superstitions, they took the opposite and much more dangerous e x t r e m e . "

42

T h e government did not

take proper steps to check the spirit of free inquiry which 41

Ibid., vol. i, pp. 451, 485; vol. v, pp. 6-8.

*- Ibid., vol. v, p. 10.

l

7 4

TRANSITION

IN ENGLISH

HISTORICAL

WRITING

turned f r o m religion to politics and, the French being more competent to frame abstract hypotheses than to reason f r o m ascertained facts to sound conclusions, political speculation led to the worst excesses of the Revolution. T h e French character had not changed in centuries, but had merely varied the objects of its unstable attachment. In the sixteenth century, the French devoted themselves to raising the priests of a superstitious religion, in the seventeenth they turned their ardent devotion to the growing absolutism and thence to " enlarging the sway of atheists and levellers " in the eighteenth century. 43 It must not be supposed that Bisset was indifferent to other phases of history than national character. H e saw behind the French Revolution not only the unstable French people lending a willing ear to irreligious and anti-monarchical doctrine, but also the fundamental fact of abuses of government needing correction they did not receive and of mistakes in foreign policy. 44 But his emphasis falls generally on points such as no writer in the calm years before 1789 would have been likely to stress, but such as were commonly stressed in the next century. He was indeed a kind of distorted and d w a r f e d image of Burke, sharing Burke's prejudices without his genius, waging the same w a r f a r e against social revolution, indulging in the same idealization of the British Constitution, assailing the French Revolution in as vigorous terms. The parallel between these so different men is closer yet, f o r Bisset's views on the American Revolution were almost a paraphrase of Burke. It may be noted, however, that while Bisset always regarded the American war as unnecessary and unfortunate, he changed his tone somewhat when the French and Spaniards were added to the enemies of Great Britain. Then, he argued, all parties ought to have rallied 43

Ibid., vol. v, p. 271.

** Ibid., vol. v, pp. 9-15.

NATIONALIST

HISTORY

175

around the national colors in defence of their country, calling those who did so " impartial patriots." 45 Like Burke, also, Bisset came to have a panic fear of the reformers of his own day. He excoriated Paine and Priestley, attributing the reform movement chiefly to the vanity of those who sought distinction by leadership in revolutionary societies. With political reforms he lumped religious innovation. Contemptuous of the excesses of the Puritans, the Quakers and Methodists were to him only " mischievous agitators of religious change," Whitefield and Wesley " mere adventurers." 48 As the Napoleonic Wars went on there appeared a number of ephemeral books of the " family history " type in which the new nationalist spirit was spread abroad. Of these we may mention Hewson Clarke's Impartial History ( 1 8 1 5 ) of the Revolutionary and Napoleonic period. Clarke was an intelligent writer, rather inclined towards liberal views. Yet his nationalism was distinctly more evident than his liberalism. His main concern was with great exploits on sea and land, the biographies of national heroes and of national foes. It will be remembered that the frontispiece of Mrs. Macaulay's History had shown the author of that work as the Muse of History and the patron of liberty. But times had changed and in Clarke's frontispiece there appeared " Britannia protecting Europe from the horrors of War and Slavery and triumphing over Discord." The British lion is shown roaring defiance by Britannia's side, while in the background are seen a burning building, a broken gun, ships of war, and the Union Jack flying amid the glare of flames and the haze of smoke. Like Burke, Clarke expressed abhorrence of the partition of Poland (the second in this case) as a sacrifice of a nation's happiness to dynastic ambitions; and like Marsh, Bisset, and others 45

Ibid., vol. 111, pp. 87-88, 138, 143.

46

Ibid., vol. i, pp. 261-262; vol. v, p. 1 1 , note.

j 76

TRANSITION

IN ENGLISH

HISTORICAL

WRITING

he was anxious to show the expedience and justice of British participation in the First Coalition against France. But he came too early in the career of nationalistic historiography to suppress his admiration for the heroism of the French armies against the invaders, nor would he accept the " atrocity " story according to which Napoleon was said to have poisoned the sick at Jaffa, reasoning judiciously that the story was improbable and certainly not proven. He showed a due nationalistic zeal about the Spanish uprisings against the French and the Peninsular War, a " sacred cause . . . so congenial to the feelings of a Briton," 47 while he was equally incensed at the Convention of Cintra, " one of the most injurious and dishonorable conventions that had disgraced the annals of English history." 48 Clarke was also author of a continuation of Hume. 49 The work itself needs no comment, but one wonders whether Hume would have welcomed his association with a work in which the frontispiece shows: " Britannia, holding the Trident of Neptune, surmounted by the Cap of Liberty, and crowned by Victory, tramples on the chains of despotism. She holds Magna Charta in her left hand, Fame points to her principal battles inscribed on her shield, supported by the Genius of Commerce. The emblems of W a r and of the Arts, occupy the Foreground." There is something here that Hume would have recognized and approved, but he would certainly have found the colors of the picture a little gaudy and the spirit somewhat repelling. Britannia was also enshrined in the Grand National His*T Op. cit., vol. ii, pp. 10-19. 48 49

Ibid., vol. ii, p. 26.

The History of England from the invasion of Julius Caesar to the revolution in 1688. In tzvo volumes by David Hume, esq. and a further continuation to the reign of William IV, in tzvo volumes, by Hewson Clarke, esq. (London, 1 8 3 2 ) .

NATIONALIST

HISTORY

177

tory of England by the Reverend John Malham, a work permeated with patriotic ardor, glorifying national worthies and scenes of national triumph like T r a f a l g a r ; 5 0 while nationalism was also apparent in Samuel Dales' Essay on the Study of the History of England ( 1 8 0 9 ) , in George Moore's History of the British Revolution of 1688-9 ( 1 8 1 7 ) and other works of a very " popular " character. On a somewhat higher plane the new spirit of nationalism, combined with the older political partisanship, was clearly shown in Robert Southey, especially in two works of which mention will be made in this chapter. 51 The Life of Nelson ( 1 8 1 3 ) was rather biography than history. It grew out of an article in the Quarterly Review and was intended as a midshipman's manual. Though the subject was not of his choice, Southey was well pleased with his execution of the task, and countless schoolboys down to the present day would be willing to confirm him in his satisfaction. The clarity and vigor of his book made it an ideal biography for its purpose. Southey was not afraid to show the blots on his hero's career, declaring that the best eulogy of Nelson was a faithful account of his deeds. His condemnation of the breach of treaty with the Neapolitan revolutionists is as downright as anyone could wish: 52 A deplorable transaction!

A stain upon the memory of

It is symptomatic of the new era to find Malham referring to the writing of English history as " a great national w o r k . . . a task of extraordinary importance, in which every Briton is interested from the sovereign to the meanest peasant." The Grand National History of England (2nd ed., London, 1 8 1 6 ) , p. iii. 51 On Southey's nationalism see also Haller, The Early Life of Robert Southey ( N e w Y o r k , 1 9 1 7 ) , p. 176 (on Southey in Portugal) and especially the analysis of the poem Joan of Arc, in which Professor Haller shows that Southey makes Joan a saint of nationalism. Ibid., pp. 96-112. On Southey's other works, see infra, pp. 234-244. 52

Life

of Nelson

( 1 8 1 3 ) , vol. ii, p. 46.

I78

TRANSITION

IN ENGLISH

HISTORICAL

WRITING

Nelson, and the honour of England! To palliate it would be in vain; to justify it would be wicked; there is no alternative, for one who will not make himself a participator in guilt, but to record the disgraceful story with sorrow and with shame. Upon Nelson's conduct in executing Caraccioli after what seemed in the light of the evidence at Southey's disposal a hasty and unfair trial, he also pronounces " a severe and unqualified condemnation," 53 nor can he refrain from censuring Nelson's passion for Lady Hamilton. One comment shows him quite as averse to the mystical interpretation of patriotism as he was to its counterpart, " enthusiasm " in religion. Nelson had told a story of how when dejected on realizing that lack of patronage would probably hinder his rise, " a sudden glow of patriotism was kindled within me, and presented my king and my country as my patron," an experience which urged him on to great achievements. Southey compared this to mystical conversion in religion. The true cause, he said, was a depressed mind and an enfeebled body. 54 In spite of such deplorable scepticism, the Life of Nelson exhibited both nationalist passion, in its hatred of the French and glorification of British deeds, and nationalist doctrine. W e find Southey censuring the sale of Corsica on the ground that no purchase can justify one country in taking possession of another against the will of the inhabitants. He declared the statesmen and monarch responsible for this act infinitely more guilty than the " foulest murderer." 55 He sided with the Corsicans as he favored the Spaniards and Portugese because they represented the outraged rights of nationality. 50 53

Ibid., vol. ii, p. 51.

54

Ibid., vol. i, pp. 24-25.

55

Ibid., vol. i, p. 103.

58

Following the Nelson, Southey was asked to contribute to Lardner's Cabinet Encyclopaedia a series of popular lives of British admirals since the reign of Elizabeth with a preface on naval history prior to that date.

NATIONALIST

HISTORY

iyg

In the preface to his History of the Peninsular War (18231832), Southey declared that " s i n c e the publication of Strada's Decades, no history composed by one who was not an actor in it, has appeared with higher claims to authority " ; 5 7 and in one of his letters he pronounced the work sure of winning a place in Britain, Portugal and Spain. 58 This characteristic self-confidence was sadly misplaced. The History of the Peninsular War was a pot-boiler, parts of which were taken over bodily from contributions to Ballantyne's Edinburgh Annual Register.™ The History shows clearly three of the major characteristics in Southey, political partisanship, moral and religious interests, and nationalist zeal. The first chapter, an " Introductory V i e w of the States of Spain, Portugal, France and England," and subsequent summaries of the English parliamentary debates, gave opportunity for frequent sorties in the T o r y cause. " M y History of the W a r smites the Whigs, and will draw as much hatred from the Buonapartists in France, as I have the satisfaction of enjoying from their friends in England." 60 The war proved the wickedness of the Whigs, the danger of attempting to put " crude " theories of government into practice, and the particular undesirabilH e carried the enterprise through S i r W a l t e r Raleigh in four volumes which, with a fifth added a f t e r his death by Robert Bell, were widely read. 57History

of the Peninsular

War

(London, 1823-1832), vol. i, p. vi.

C. C. Southey, Life and Correspondence don, 1849-50), vol. v, p. 182. 58

of Robert

Southey

(Lon-

5 9 Southey said of the second volume: " A large portion of the volume will be transferred f r o m the ' Edinburgh Annual R e g i s t e r ' without much a l t e r a t i o n " ( W a r t e r , Selections from the Letters of Robert Southey, London, 1856, vol. iii, pp. 326-7), and L. P f a n d l ( " R o b e r t Southey und Spanien " in Revue Hispanique, T o m e xxviii, Paris, 1913, pp. 86-87) gives examples of direct borrowing. 80

Life

and Correspondence,

vol. v, p. 112.

j8O

TRANSITION

IN ENGLISH

HISTORICAL

WRITING

ity of foisting representative institutions upon peoples unprepared for them. From the struggle of the Peninsula Southey drew certain moral and religious lessons. Indeed he made a special point of calling attention to the moral spirit pervading his work. In his case, as in that of his friend Turner, religion and morality played a larger part in his later than in his earlier works. He solemnly asserted that the Napoleonic usurpation in the Peninsula was divine retribution for Portugese and Spanish atrocities in the Netherlands, India and the New World, and for the Inquisition. These crimes brought inevitable degradation upon the two peoples who perpetrated them. Only a great moral and political earthquake could bring purgation. He was illustrating the ways of Providence in writing the history of this war. 81 But stronger than party or religious spirit was the nationalist zeal in Southey's book. He saw the war as a crusade. 62 It showed " that national independence depends upon national spirit, but that even that spirit in its highest and heroic degree may fail if wisdom to direct it be wanting." 63 By this Southey meant that the Spaniards needed British leadership. He extolled the motives of British intervention and retailed war myths without question. The French appear as monsters of iniquity, while on the allied side " not an outrage, not an excess, not an insult was committed." 64 British leadership allowed expression to the best features of the Spanish and Portugese character—bravery and national spirit—but restrained the natural cruelty of these peoples. Before Southey's last volume was on the market and at the 61

History

62

Ibid., vol. i, pp. 1-2.

63

Ibid., vol. iii, p. 927.

64

of the Peninsular

War,

vol. ii, pp. 24-25.

Ibid., vol. iii, p. 925. But elsewhere (vol. ii. p. 699) he does give one lone instance of mistreatment of prisoners by the Spaniards.

NATIONALIST

HISTORY

181

very end of our period there began to appear a history of the Peninsular W a r besides which his own shrinks into insignificance. Napier 85 was superior in intellect, in style, and in knowledge of the subject. He wrote from a fullness of experience in the war, with ample leisure at his command, and with access to the best sources of information. He was able to consult the papers on both sides and to interview the leaders themselves. When poor Southey sought permission to see Wellington's files the request was refused. Napier belongs to a later period than ours, but requires some words of comment. Unlike Southey he stressed the military rather than the political side of the war. But he was an equally strong nationalist, although distinguished from Southey in having pro-French and anti-Spanish feelings. Southey, who would not be betrayed into admiring the national enemy, was more conventionally pro-Spanish and anti-French. Napier also was intensely liberal in political sympathy. Thus apart from the fact of its greatness, Napier's book is significant in two respects. Its appearance was one of the signs of the overthrow of Tory historiography and it is the first example of nationalism in an English history of the highest order of excellence. Napier's work is still classic while Southey's pot-boiler is long since forgotten. But as late as 1837 Southey was confident it would win a place in literature.86 Nationalism is often regarded as an unmitigated curse to historiography. But in the end there was gain as well as loss in its growth. It is a more inclusive, a more generous motivating principle in certain respects than partisan, class, or sectarian zeal which divides men of the same origin into different groups. The sympathies of the nationalist may in85 W . F . P. Napier, History of the War in the Peninsula and. in the South of France, from the year 1807 to the year 1814 (London, 1828-40). 86

Warter, op. cit., vol. iv, p. 503.

182

TRANSITION

IN ENGLISH

HISTORICAL

WRITING

elude all who belong to his own nation, from the masses at the bottom to the sovereign at the top. Against this, however, must be set an increased antipathy for foreign nations. Nationalist historians have also tended to emphasize historical continuity more strongly than their predecessors. Their desire to study the experience of this national community from age to age through long centuries of evolution, to trace it back to its remote origins, stimulated further a genetic, truly historical approach. Nationalism also had in the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries a broadening influence since it was one of the factors responsible for renewed interest in the middle ages.

CHAPTER

VII

P A R T Y H I S T O R Y FROM 1 8 0 0 TO 1 8 2 7 : T H E AND LIBERAL

WHIG

EMPHASIS

AFTER this excursion into the field of nationalism we shall return to the succession of party histories after 1800. Most of those included in Chapter I I I had made appreciable additions to historical knowledge and have a place in the story of research. Generally speaking too, they treated only of times prior to George III. But as the century wore on there came a crop of " Annals " or " Histories " of George I l l ' s reign, some of them widely known at the time. Such accounts were usually very partisan and have not lasted until today because they have little value as contemporary sources, since they were not written by statesmen, and came too early to possess the value of solid secondary accounts based on wide use of original sources. They belonged to a familiar type of contemporary or near-contemporary history which seldom has a long life. It will be useful, however, to mention two of the most popular in this group; for such books show how the eighteenth century was gradually taking its place beside the seventeenth as a battle ground for party historians. William Belsham devoted a long life to writings in defence of W h i g principles as applied to past and present issues. F o r nearly twenty years after 1789 he is said to have produced at least one volume or pamphlet almost every year, the product of literary interests and close association with 183

J84

TRANSITION

IN ENGLISH

HISTORICAL

WRITING

leaders of the W h i g party. 1 His most extensive series of volumes covered the history of Great Britain from the Revolution to the death of George III in 1820.2 T w o strong prejudices warped the judgment of Belsham. He was, in the first place, a staunch Whig of the Fox group. He believed firmly in the necessity for parliamentary reform and professed dismay at the political and social tendencies of the times—increasing poverty for the many, wealth for the few; a national debt corrupting the body politic, a constitution sapped by the revival of the royal prerogative, and private life degenerating through the growth of luxury. All this, the theme song of a certain type of Whiggism, determined the picture given of England since 1688. In the second place, Belsham was a convinced anti-clerical. " The spirit of High-Churchism, which is a compound essence exhaled from the ingredients of pride, ignorance, malice, prejudice and folly, has, during this reign, been in a regular and progressive state of increase; and as the same causes which have operated still continue to operate, it is probable that until some violent convulsion is produced by a new Laudian or Sheldonian persecution, the tide will continue 1 Dictionary of National Biography; Gentleman's Magazine ( L o n d o n , 1828), vol. xcviii, pp. 274-275; Literary Gazette and Journal of the Belles Lettres, no. 566 ( L o n d o n , N o v . 24, 1827), p. 762. 2 T h e s e a p p e a r e d a s f o l l o w s : Memoirs of the Kings of Great Britain of the House of Brunswic-Lunenburg ( L o n d o n , 1793) ; Memoirs of the Reign of George III to the session of Parliament ending A. D. 1793 ( L o n d o n , 1795) ! History of Great Britain from the Revolution to the accession of the House of Hanover ( L o n d o n , 1798) ; Memoirs of the Reign of George III to the Commencement of the Year 1799 ( L o n d o n , 1801) ; History of Great Britain, from the Revolution, 168S, to the conclusion of the Treaty of Amiens, 1802 ( L o n d o n , 1805—comprises e a r l i e r v o l u m e s plus t w o on t h e period, 1799 t o A m i e n s ) ; Memoirs of the Reign of George III from the treaty of Amiens, A. D. 1802, to the termination of the Regency, A. D. 1820 ( L o n d o n , 1824). M e n t i o n should also be m a d e of his Essays, philosophical, historical and literary ( L o n d o n , 1789, w i t h a second v o l u m e in 1791).

PARTY

HISTORY,

1800-18Z7

185

to flow in the same channel and direction." 3 H e not only saw, what indeed history seems to confirm, that there is no necessary connection between religious piety and ethical behaviour, but ascribed a peculiar passion for power and a peculiar unscrupulousness in its attainment to priests of all religions.* When we add to Belsham's shortcomings as a scholar, his prejudices, and his loose and rather bombastic style, it may seem as if he were quite without merit—a violent, uninformed, pugnacious pamphleteer. It would manifestly be very difficult to make out a strong case for him as an historian. Yet since he was successful in his own day, it is worth while to see what pleas may be entered in mitigation of sentence. He aimed at seeing how far the " grand fabric of liberty completed at the Revolution, had been preserved or allowed to decay in succeeding years. In this enterprise he frankly disavowed that " frigid philosophy " which aims at narrating events and portraying characters irrespective of their moral implications. Rather he held it to be the historian's function to distribute praise and blame for the instruction of posterity. 8 Yet he does not always praise Whigs nor always blame Tories. He wrote from Whig principles rather than merely for the Whig party. He was a severe, not unintelligent, publicist, influenced by dissenting religious and ethical standards, strongly liberal in political outlook, and with a due sense of the importance of his vocation. H e was criticized by Coxe for his animadversions on 3

Memoirs of the Reign of George I I I , to the session of ending A. D. 1793 (1795), vol. ii, p. 155.

Parliament

* History of Great Britain, from the Revolution to the accession the House of Hanover (1798), vol. i, pp. 299, 456-457. 6 Memoirs of the Kings of Great Britain Lunenburg (1793), vol. i, p. 61. 8

of the House of

of

Brunsunc-

History of Great Brttain from the Revolution, 1688, to the conclusion of the Treaty of Amiens, 1802 (1805), vol. xi, "Advertisement."

i86

TRANSITION

IN ENGLISH

HISTORICAL

WRITING

the regime of Sir Robert Walpole, but in fact he recognized the national services of this great statesman while deploring the corruption characteristic of his administration.7 For Hume's History, apart from its Tory coloring and philosophical indifference, he had the highest praise.8 He approximated the historical attitude in his estimate of Elizabeth." No admirer of Burke's principles as a rule, he nevertheless agreed with the Reflections that the British Constitution had not been struck off in a heat nor was it the product of the speculative sagacity of a few individuals.10 Belsham was wholeheartedly on the side of the rebellious Americans whom he compared to the Greeks fighting for European liberty against Persian aggression, 11 but his attitude towards the French Revolution was almost necessarily more complex. The earlier stages he, like an orthodox Foxite, viewed with approval. But he deplored the Constitution of 1793, Jacobinism, and the Terror. Deprecating the growth of the " profligate ambition and presumption " of the France of the Directory and Napoleon, he yet set this off against the " pride, folly, and mischievous activity of the British administration." Openly critical of Nelson's acts in Naples, he could also write favorably of the French internal government in 1805—a fact which must always appear striking after the nationalist hysteria attending the corresponding twentieth-century battle of giant nations. Since he did not view the war as one for freedom or peace he looked forward with pessimism to the future. " Who, in fine," he says in concluding the twelfth volume of his collected history, in T

Memoirs of....

8

Ibid., vol. ii, p. 380.

9

Essays, philosophical historical, and literary ( 1 7 8 9 - 1 7 9 1 ) , vol. i, pp.

the House of BrunsvAc-Lunenburg,

vol. ii, pp. 53-54.

49-5010 11

Memoirs of ...the

Memoirs

House of Brunswic-Lunenburg,

vol. ii, p. 132.

of the Reign of George III, vol. ii, pp. 72-73, 349-351.

PARTY

HISTORY,

1800-18Ì7

187

1805, " e v e r did, or even can, declare Europe to be in such a state of security, as to preclude subsequent innovations by the hand of violence? Treaties cannot bind the ambition of nations; the powerful will oppress the weak; riches will incite the attempts of avarice; the interests of the many will be sacrificed to the selfishness or vanity of the f e w ; and the relative situation of the nations of the globe, will, like the lunar disc, be in a state of perpetual variation." 1 2 The two volumes published in 1824 when Belsham was an old man constitute a kind of epilogue to the main work and show how tenaciously the author clung to his opinions. Their theme is the unfortunate consequences of the " Gallic W a r " : strengthened despotism and bigotry abroad, especially the enormous aggrandisement of Russia ( " to which no adequate barrier can be opposed " ) , the enslavement of Italy and the political annihilation of Denmark; at home, increased debts and taxes, pauperism, a stronger military establishment, the decline of liberty, and the advance of royal prerogative. With this gloomy analysis, Belsham contrasted the state of England on the accession of George III. Somewhat milder in tone than formerly, he nevertheless remained a thorough Whig, equally opposed to the politics of the Court and to the new lower-class radical movements. For almost a generation in spite of his shortcomings in research, recognized from the very beginning by students like Coxe, 1 3 he held a prominent place among party historians, that contemporary renown which so often leads to complete oblivion as time displaces the materials with which a popular writer has worked, or popular tastes turn to other types of composition. The noted barrister John Adolphus 12

History

of Great Britain

13

See Recollections

carried on the Tory

(1805), vol. xii, pp. 482-483.

Memoirs of the Life and Administration (London, 1798), vol. i, p. xviii. 14

14

of Sir Robert

Walpole

of the Public Career and Private Life of the Late

J88

TRANSITION

IN ENGLISH

HISTORICAL

WRITING

tradition especially in his History of England, from the accession of George III to the conclusion of peace in the year one thousand seven hundred and eighty three (1802). Adolphus was superior to the general run of Annalists. Like Gibbon he claimed to regard the accumulation and narration of facts as the chief duty of the historian; while he was like Robertson in accepting a doctrine of the dignity of history which excluded from his narrative some interesting anecdotes that might otherwise have found a place. 10 Y e t he also shows signs of a new age, for example in his recognition that historical characters must not be viewed as wholly good or wholly evil, but as human beings to be portrayed in all their moods. Moreover he aspired to explain the conduct of politicians whom he disliked by party connections or the legitimate ambitions of honorable men rather than by ascribing to them base designs against liberty or moral depravity " which is characteristic neither of the nations nor the times on which I have treated." 16 H e did not seek to conceal, in fact he definitely outlines, in the beginning of the History, his own political prepossessions, but he discusses them in such a way as to arouse confidence on the part of his readers. He admitted to a warm admiration for the established order in Church and State, a reverence for George III, a dislike of "crude reforms," and withal a belief that liberty and honesty were more general in his day than ever before. 17 Thus Adolphus was an intelligent, restrained conservative, settled in his views, but unwilling to condemn all who opposed him. Such men are sometimes the truest liberals; in any John Adolphus... with extracts Henderson (London, 1871).

from

his diaries,

15 History of England, from the accession 1802), vol. i, pp. iv-v, 128 and note, 544, note. 16

Ibid., vol. i, P r e f a c e .

17

Ibid., vol. i, pp. v i i - i x ; vol. iii, pp. 599-600.

of

by his daughter George

III

Emily

(London,

PARTY

HISTORY,

1800-18Z7

event Adolphus achieved the difficult feat of having his History praised both by George III and the Edinburgh Review; 18 while he was the friend of Coxe and was commended by Somerville.19 Part of his History was translated into German; in England it had gone through four editions when at the age of seventy the author undertook to prepare a continuation to the death of George III. Adolphus had the advantage of access to Coxe's materials and to other private papers which enabled him to throw new light on some transactions of George Ill's reign. He was mainly interested in parliamentary history and he presented excellent summaries of the debates. His style was less diffuse than Belsham as his mind was more judicial, and he was far more careful to give footnotes and references to his authorities. Though a Tory, he sought to give both sides by digesting opposing arguments. But his anxiety to defend Lord Bute and his justifications of George III were clearly shown. The most important topic with which Adolphus had to deal was the American Revolution. He treated it far better than Belsham, recognizing how the situation was complicated by the presence of such factors as debts, and naturally not indulging in talk about the " invincible spirit" of the Americans which was apt to clog the pages of Whig accounts. His preliminary discussion of American affairs pointed out the difference in situation between Great Britain and the colonies and between the various colonies themselves. He admitted that the vast majority of the colonists did not seek independence at first, and confessed also to the unwisdom of some of the earlier acts of the British Government.'"0 But he argued 18

Henderson, op. cit., p. 97.

19

M ^ Own Life, p. 314.

20

History

of England,

vol. i, pp. 156-170.

I90

TRANSITION

IN ENGLISH

HISTORICAL

WRITING

the necessity of punishment for disloyalty by the time of Burke's speech on conciliation. And as affairs grew still more serious so did Adolphus's philosophic calm grow less. He begins to charge the Americans with hypocrisy, and where they appealed to heaven, of " puritanical cant." 2 1 The Petition to the King from the Continental Congress of 1 7 7 4 he calls "merely an insidious mockery." He finds their address to the people of America imbued with a " spirit of hostility and resistance alone " while " that to the Canadians discovers the deepest and most inveterate malignity against Great Britain, and is replete with mean artifices to cajole the people into disaffection." 22 Thus he more and more indulges in censure instead of maintaining the judicial impartiality upon which he appears to have prided himself. He was contemptuous of the Declaration of Independence, incensed at the Franco-American alliance, and accused the Americans of occasional cruelty to prisoners of war. On the other hand he detailed the good treatment of Burgoyne's army on its surrender to Gates and pays a tribute to the qualities of George Washington. 23 He tried his best to give credit where credit was due. Adolphus was also the author of several works on the French Revolution which may be dispatched with merciful brevity. The Biographical Memoirs of the French Revolution ( 1 7 9 9 ) dealt with some of the important figures in contemporary France. Dedicated to Windham, it defended the memory of Louis X V I and Marie Antoinette, and was absurdly biassed. His History of France from the year 1780 to the Peace concluded at Amiens in 1802 ( 1 8 0 3 ) was a mere compilation picturing a diabolical revolution caused by a diabolical conspiracy, and showing a total absence of any 21

Ibid., vol. ii, pp. 144, 161.

22

Ibid., vol. ii, p. 167.

23

Ibid., vol. ii, p. S3S; vol. iii, pp. 590-591.

PARTY

HISTORY,

1800-1827

I9I

historical sense. Adolphus was also the author of a large pamphlet, Reflections on the Causes of the Present Rupture with France ( 1 8 0 3 ) , justifying the war after Amiens. His attitude towards France was that of a strong Tory of today towards Russia. He was willing to swallow any atrocity story, but showed absolutely no ability to see the constructive measures taken, for example, by the National Convention. He was no longer, as in the case of his History of England, seeking to be impartial, for France was the national enemy and historical impartiality no virtue. Yet to be insane on the subject of France was no condemnation, and certainly must not be allowed to conceal the fact that among the writers of " Annals " Adolphus ranks high. He produced substantial books that were long read and helped to shape the prevailing attitude of at least a generation.24 Both scholarship and the Whig cause were aided by William Coxe, Archdeacon of Wiltshire. Educated at Cambridge, Coxe is said to have been directed towards the production of learned works by a teacher at King's College. A s tutor to sons of the nobility, and later as archdeacon, he traveled through a great part of the Continent and was given access to many valuable papers both at home and abroad. On the basis of these materials he produced a whole series of volumes on the eighteenth century as well as a History cf the House of Austria, perhaps his best known work, and a volume of Spanish history. Coxe's works were, and to some extent still are, valuable for the documents contained. Of the three volumes of the Memoirs of Sir Robert IValpole ( 1 7 9 8 ) two are composed 24

Adolphus compiled also the Political State of the British Empire; containing a general view of the domestic and foreign possessions of the crown; the laws, commerce, revenues, offices, and other establishments, civil and military (London, 1818), and The British Cabinet; containing portraits of illustrious personages, engraved from original pictures: with biographical memoirs (London 1799-1800).

ig2

TRANSITION

IN ENGLISH

HISTORICAL

WRITING

wholly of correspondence. The Memoirs of Horatio, Lord Walpole (1802) is really a collection of letters and papers, with a connecting text, rather than biography or history. T h e Memoirs of Marlborough ( 1 8 1 8 - 1 8 1 9 ) contains a larger percentage of Coxe's own composition, but contains much source material too. 25 This is even more true of the Correspondence of Charles Talbot ( 1 8 2 1 ) which is still a very important book. 26 The posthumous Memoirs of Henry Pelham (1829) are of the same general character, containing a good deal of correspondence and documentary material scattered through the text, while the last two hundred pages of volume two consist wholly of original sources. C o x e was also author of several works of travel and description. The History of the House of Austria (1807) was a largescale epitome, distinguished among such productions by wide use of manuscripts, oral sources, and dissertations on special topics. It belongs definitely to the nineteenth century in style and tone. The sentences are short and clear; it is a work of exposition, the narration of concrete facts rather than the expounding of historical philosophy. The arrangement is annalistic though there are summaries at intervals. A commendable list of authorities ends each chapter. Competent but undistinguished, Coxe develops no views that are worthy of attention, no special interpretation of Austrian history. The Memoirs of the House of Bourbon ( 1 8 1 3 ) was a pioneer attempt to relate the history of Spain from the accession of Philip the F i f t h to that of Charles the Fourth. T o the body of the narrative was prefixed an Introduction 2 5 " The best life of Marlborough is by Coxe, and is now a century old." W . T . Morgan, Political Parties in the Reign of Queen Anne ( N e w Haven, 1920), p. 8. Morgan also says: " C o x e ' s comments add value to many of the letters he copied." Ibid., p. 409. 2 6 They are "extremely valuable for the reign of William III, especially for 1694-8." Davies, op. cit., p. 12.

PARTY

HISTORY,

1800-1827

193

covering the period from the union of Castile and Aragon to the extinction of the Austrian line. In this work too, Coxe used original and unprinted sources. He appears not to have read Spanish and Portuguese, but he had assistants who did, and was either able to handle German himself or hired others who could. As an historian, Coxe leaves much to be desired. His style was often dull. He showed no grasp of historical forces, no ability to organize his materials. Moreover, history was to him merely a record of wars, diplomacy and politics, with a succession of great men holding the strings of events.27 He was intensely biassed in favor of the Whigs. Not only does this color his narrative, but he sometimes stops to argue with the opponents of his Whig heroes. And once when his hero is clearly in the wrong there are traces of conscious or unconscious use of another device. That is, he begins by a frank admission that his character is guilty of the offence charged against him. Then, apparently with the sincere belief that he is pointing out the "truth " from the " facts," he proceeds to give an account of the circumstances of the action so favorable to his chosen character as to nullify or at least modify the bad impression previously given.28 This, as we said, was perhaps due to unconscious bias. It is more difficult to explain away a passage in Somerville's Memoirs which 27

" Unfortunately f o r man, it is the sword which decides the fate of nations, secures their tranquility, and promotes their aggrandizement;— it is the sword alone which is the guardian of national honour, and the protector of public and private happiness. Commerce may enrich, the arts may civilize, science may illuminate a people; but these blessings can only owe their safety and stability to military force. War, therefore, to the regret of every milder virtue, must form the principal subject of History." History of the House of Austria (London, 1807), vol. i, Preface. 28

Memoirs of John, Duke of Marlborough pp. x, 41-42.

(London, 1 8 1 8 - 1 8 1 9 ) , vol. i,

194

TRANSITION

IN ENGLISH

HISTORICAL

WRITING

throws too important a light on Coxe's historical standards not to be quoted: 28 The Rev. Mr. Coxe, in transmitting to me such of the Orford and Townshend papers as he thought likely to convey valuable information relative to public events during the reign of Queen Anne and King William, at the same time accompanied them with restrictive recommendations, which narrowed their usefulness. He insinuated that it would be gratifying to the proprietors if I found myself warranted, by the evidence contained in them, to justify the Whig ministry for rejecting the terms of the peace proposed by Louis X I V in 1707-9. But Coxe was more than a mere partisan. He had all the nineteenth-century scholar's pride in the variety, extent and rarity of his sources. He was acutely conscious of the necessity of going beyond printed papers to the manuscripts, and eagerly grasped at oral tradition and anecdote also. In this zeal for original research we see again signs that the emphasis upon " philosophy " and the interpretation of history was giving place to a new school that would consist of scholars rather than writers. It is perhaps significant, also, to note that Coxe's later works suggest an increasing consciousness of nationality. His earlier works were the result of research and partisan zeal. The Spain, however, appeared in the exciting days of 1 8 1 3 . Coxe tells us that his attention was drawn to the modern history of Spain by " the burst of patriotic enthusiasm which the usurpation and perfidy of the French ruler excited among the Spaniards, and the deep interest which the British public took in the exertions of a brave and magnanimous nation combating in the sacred 29 My Ozvn Life, pp. 289-290. T . H . Buckle, Miscellaneous and Posthumous Works, (London, 1872), vol. i, p. 214 makes a similar charge of what is practically dishonesty.

PARTY

HISTORY,

1800-1827

*95

cause of freedom and independence." 80 This work he dedicates to Wellington with a note of patriotic exultation over the recent victories of British arms in the Peninsular War. In the Memoirs of Marlborough again Coxe laments " as an Englishman " the absence of such a study; it is a " history which may be considered as truly national "—and he refers to " our national historians." 3 1 This nationalist note was now appearing more and more frequently. The Tory view of the seventeenth century evoked an answer from no less a person than Charles James F o x whose History of the Early Part of the Reign of James the Second ( 1 8 0 8 ) was the only fragment ever published of a projected account of the Revolution. It comprised an introductory chapter on the period 1640 to 1685, a more detailed account of James II's reign to the execution of Monmouth, and an appendix of documents.32 F o x sought to weave his facts into a continuous narrative without notes, disgressions or supplementary dissertations and limited the scope of his subject matter to public affairs that this might be done more successfully. Actually, however, he wrote history in the manner of a Parliamentary debate rather than a narrative. " There is about the whole book," as Macaulay so justly said, 33 " a vehement, contentious, replying manner. Almost every argument is put in the form of an interrogation, an ejaculation, or a sarcasm. The writer seems to be addressing himself to some imaginary audience, to be tearing in pieces a defence of the Stuarts which has just been pro30

Memoirs of the Kings of Spain of the House 1 8 1 3 ) , vol. i, Preface, p. x. 31

Memoirs i, pp. ix-x. 32 33

of John, Duke of Marlborough

of Bourbon

(London,

(London, 1818-1819), vol.

The documents are still of some convenience.

Davies, op. cit., p. 21.

In comparing F o x and Sir James Mackintosh, Essays, Critical, torical, and Miscellaneous (New York, i860), vol. iii, p. 255.

His-

I 9

6

TRANSITION

IN ENGLISH

HISTORICAL

WRITING

nounced by an imaginary Tory." Fox's partiality was too strong, too undisguised for him ever to have attained complete success as a historian.34 His was no philosophical adherence to a position arising out of the historical situation, nor would he have secured a prominent place because of research, to which he was indifferent, or because of the publication of documents, in which he was not vitally interested.85 He carried back to the seventeenth century the passions of the politics of his own day, and at his best wrote history in the manner of the ancient rhetoricians. It is scarcely to be expected that his work if it had ever been completed would have won him a high place among historians. Another Whig historian, Malcolm Laing, was a friend of F o x and a successful lawyer by profession. He has already been mentioned for his completion of the sixth volume of Henry's History of Great Britain; besides this he edited the " Historie and Life of King James the Sext " and the poems attributed to Ossian.38 His dissertation to prove the complicity of Mary, Queen of Scots, in the murder of Darnley, and his scathing exposure of the Ossianic fraud were issued as appendices to his chief work, the History of Scotland (1800). Fox was pleased to think that his friend's History would " serve to counteract the mischief which Hume, Dalrymple, Macpherson, Somerville, and others of your countrymen have done," 3 7 but such was not Laing's primary aim. 31 Rt. Hon. George Rose, Observations (London, 1809), esp. pp. vii-ix. 35

on Fox's

Historical

Work

Ibid., p. xi.

The Historie and Life of King James the Sext (Edinburgh, 1804), which I have not seen. The Poems of Ossian, containing the Poetical Works of James Macpherson in prose and verse, with notes and illustrations (London, 1805). 36

37 C. J. Fox, A History of the Early Part of the Reign of James Second (London, 1808), p. xxi.

the

PARTY

HISTORY,

1800-1827

197

Rather he sought to fill a gap in the history of his country by continuing the work of Robertson f r o m 1 6 0 3 to 1 7 0 7 . L a i n g had much in common with Robertson. Equally industrious in research, he used the manuscripts in the A d v o cates L i b r a r y at Edinburgh, the Calderwood manuscripts f o r church history, the privy council records, and documents in private hands. 38 Like Robertson, too, he embodies much material in the form of dissertations, notes and " illustrations." Rather paradoxically, however, he was inclined to be impatient or even contemptuous in his attitude towards a period requiring as much attention to religious disputes as seventeenth-century Scotland. H e thought that history should treat mainly of diplomacy and politics and when he discussed social and religious topics in his section on the Protectorate, he excuses the lapse from historical dignity by saying that no " public or important " events, except the royalist insurrection of 1 6 5 4 , occurred in Scotland during this period. " Y e t the civil and military institutions of the conqueror, the innovations produced by a new government, and the internal progressive state of the country and its inhabitants, may furnish a subject of curious inquiry, when the history of public transactions is silent." 39 L a i n g made an honest attempt to be impartial, and specifically disclaimed any pragmatic aim, at least in the narrower sense of making the story of the past a direct commentary on present times. " It would be difficult to speak of the present times without degenerating either into adulation or censure, and absurd indeed to render the history of the last century a comment on the philosophy or folly of the present." 40 a8

His use of sources and treatment of Scottish history were, however, criticized rather severely by G. Brodie, History of the British Empire (Edinburgh, 1822), vol. iii, pp. 294, 336 note, 516 note, passim. 39

The History

40

Ibid., vol. i, p. vii.

of Scotland...

(London, 1800), vol. i, pp. 438-439.

I 9

g

TRANSITION

IN ENGLISH

HISTORICAL

WRITING

Yet none the less his account is vigorously Whiggish. He viewed both Stuarts and Republicans with equal disfavor, and completely failed, as had everyone before him, in the interpretation of Cromwell. 41 In one respect, perhaps, this statement might be qualified, for there are some friendly pages on the Independents, whose advocacy of toleration Laing approved while he disliked their " enthusiasm." 4 2 H i s account of the administration of Scotland a f t e r the Restoration became almost a series of atrocity stories, while the end of the Stuart regime he characterized as a " sanguinary and cruel despotism." 43 His enthusiasm for William I I I was almost unbounded, but a touch of Scottish patriotism made him point out that William left Scotland in the hands of subordinates who did not do their master credit. Yet any partiality in Laing was too obvious to be dangerous and too superficial to cancel his undoubted merits. In many ways a late heir of the tradition of the Enlightenment, he was an illustration of the fact that such a tradition was quite compatible with industrious and accurate research. If he never attained a high level of style, and sometimes sank into dullness, he won deserved contemporary approval and enjoys a reward for honest and intelligent labor in the fact that his narrative is still cited occasionally. 44 A f t e r the lapse of more than a hundred years this is no mean distinction. T h e three most considerable party histories marking the renewed attack on the Tories were those of Brodie, Godwin and Hallam. But several small books by Lord John, the first Earl Russell, attained popularity and were of course written f r o m a W h i g standpoint. The Life of IVilliam Lord Russell; with some Account of the Times in which he lived 41

Ibid., vol. i, p. 472.

42

Ibid., vol. i, pp. 269-278.

43

Ibid., vol. ii, p. 2.

44

G. Davies, op. cit., p. 304.

PARTY

HISTORY,

1800-1827

199

( 1 8 1 9 ) went through three editions in two years, and reached a fourth in 1 8 5 3 . The spirit in which L o r d J o h n worked is beyond reproach. He readily granted that the Tories were attached to the constitution as much as the Whigs. 4 5 Of H u m e he spoke with respect. 48 But he was annoyed at the invidious conclusions drawn by writers like Dalrymple 4 7 f r o m the conduct of the Whigs in Charles I I ' s reign: The concert between the popular party and France was a concert only in name. The opposition continued, as before, pursuing their own purpose, which so far from being French, was the preservation of the English religion and laws. They promised, it is true, to prevent, if possible, the war with France, but it was their bounden duty to do so. They had every reason to suppose that it was intended as a death-blow to liberty.48 A s f o r the additional charge that the " popular party " had also accepted money from France, L o r d J o h n had several reservations to make. Barillon, the French ambassador, upon whose statement the accusation rested, might well have been dishonest and have put into his own pocket the sums he pretended to have paid to English leaders. E v e n if we assume that Barillon was honest, he may have been deceived by " corrupt and worthless emissaries." 4 9 Coleman, at least, who confessed to having received French money f o r distribution among members of Parliament, denied that he had actually distributed it. The most probable conclusion to be drawn f r o m the evidence, L o r d John thought, was that some obscure politicians were bribed but that Barillon was deceived in believing he had reached the leaders. L o r d Wil43 The Life of William i, pp. 188-189.

Lord

Russell

(3rd edition, London, 1 8 2 0 ) , vol.

10

Ibid.,

47

Ibid., vol. i, pp. xi-xii, 198; vol. ii, pp. 140, 160.

48

Ibid.,

vol. i, p. 120.

49

Ibid.,

vol. i, p. 196.

vol. i, p. x i .

200

TRANSITION

IN ENGLISH

HISTORICAL

WRITING

liarn was certainly free from this taint in spite of his imprudent communications with France. 50 This was a Whig interpretation of certain famous events. But it was not a very virulent form of partisanship. Nor could much exception be taken to the spirit in which the career of Lord William himself is treated in his descendant's pages. He is represented as a man of not very brilliant talents. His animosity against the Roman Catholics, while placed almost wholly on political grounds, is condemned. The charge that he opposed the remission by Charles of that part of the sentence of death against Lord Stafford which ordered him to be drawn and quartered is shown to rest solely upon the unfriendly authority of Echard; but such an action if true, is declared to be properly subject to unqualified censure. 51 Even in dealing with the death of Lord William for treason a proper balance is maintained by his biographer. Lord William was convicted upon insufficient evidence, his condemnation was unjust, his execution tyrannical. Still, said Lord John, some of the legal objections advanced in his behalf were without force, the usage he received was not under the circumstances extremely unfair, and Charles, " though inexorable, seems by no means to have been wantonly unfeeling." 52 An Essay on the History of the English Government and Constitution from the reign of Henry VII to the present time ( 1 8 2 1 ) was widely read in England and translated into both French and German. It was both a history and a commentary on the English government, some of its thirty-five chapters being devoted to topics like the place of party, the kinds of liberty, criminal law, public schools and the national 50

81

Ibid., vol. i, pp. 190-193, 199-200.

Ibid., vol. i, p. 236. 62 Ibid., vol. ii, pp. 73, 137.

PARTY

HISTORY,

20I

1800-1827

debt. The whole essay in its original form was little more than 60,000 words in length. Its brevity, clarity and moderate Whiggism gave it great popularity. Lord John Russell also published during this period Memoirs of the Affairs of Europe from the Peace of Utrecht ( 1 8 2 4 - 1 8 2 9 ) . Isaac D' Israeli wrote from a Tory standpoint in his Inquiry into the Literary and Political Character of James I ( 1 8 1 6 ) and his five volumes of Commentaries on the Life and Reign of Charles I ( 1 8 2 8 - 1 8 3 1 ) ; but he was distinguished less for partisanship than for zeal in searching out original materials. 53 G. W. Meadley 54 was a biographer of Algernon Sidney and others, while Lucy Aikin 55 produced a series of " Memoirs " after 1 8 1 8 . Both Meadley and Aikin were liberal in outlook. The title of George Brodie's History of the British Empire, from the accession of Charles I to the Restoration ( 1 8 2 2 ) was misleading. There was no effort to trace the history of overseas possessions, but merely the constitutional history of England, Scotland and Ireland, with a good deal in addition about politics and military affairs. 56 The book was a counterblast to Hume's views on the Tudors and Stuarts. Brodie made an independent survey of the materials for these periods from an advanced Whig standpoint. He used manuscripts in the Advocates Library at Edinburgh, the British Museum, the Bodleian, and the Archbishop of Canterbury's Library at Lambeth. His first 53

I. D'Isracli, An Inquiry intp the Literary and Political Character of James the First (London, 1816) ; Commentaries on the Life and Reign of Charles the First, King of England (London, 1828-31). 6

* G . W. Meadley, Memoirs

of Algernon

Sydney

(London, 1 8 1 3 ) .

65

Lucy Aikin, Memoirs of the Court of Queen Elizabeth (London, 1818) ; Memoirs of the Court of King James the First (London, 1822) ; Memoirs of the Court of King Charles the First (London, 1833). 56 The edition of 1866 was more correctly entitled A History of the British Empire (London, 1866).

Constitutional

202

TRANSITION

IN ENGLISH

HISTORICAL

WRITING

hundred and fifty pages made a rapid survey of English constitutional history to the close of Elizabeth's reign. Brodie then embarked upon a discussion, approximately equal in length, of the institutions and usages of T u d o r times upon which H u m e had based his analogy of the English government with that of Turkey. 5 7 The third chapter treated of James I, and volume one then closed with two chapters on Scotland and Ireland. T h e next two volumes and almost one-half of the fourth traced the reign of Charles I in detail, while brief surveys of the Commonwealth and Protectorate brought the work to a close with the Restoration. H u m e had portrayed the instances of arbitrary government he found in English history, especially under the Tudors, as " the abstract of tyranny; " 58 Brodie sought to show that they were exceptional acts to meet certain emergencies. The essence of English Government was limited monarchy and through all vicissitudes " the grand principles of the constitution were preserved, however, its spirit might occasionally slumber." 58 He not only challenged H u m e ' s interpretation of the English constitution; but by listing many mistakes of fact, misuse of sources, and instances of prejudice attacked H u m e ' s competence as a reporter of events. H a d Brodie not lacked certain qualities desirable in the historian, it is difficult to see how H u m e could have survived the detailed exposure of his blunders. F o r the Stuarts, whom he regarded as having sought to subvert the established constitution of England, Brodie had little short of detestation. James I he viewed as " destitute not only of the qualities that win, and the talents that dazzle, " A History of the British Empire, from the accession to the Restoration ( E d i n b u r g h , 1 8 2 2 ) , vol. i, pp. 158-326. 58

Ibid.,

69

of Charles

vol. i, p. 2 2 3 ; c f . vol. i, pp. 343 note; vol. ii, p. 281.

Ibid., vol. i, p. 1 5 4 ; c f . vol. i, pp. 325, 327.

I

PARTY

HISTORY,

l&OO-lffl

203

and impose upon mankind, but of even the essential virtue of ordinary sincerity . . . in his whole conduct, he evinced a total want, not only of common discretion, but of common decency. . . . " 80 H e was also uniformly unfavorable in his interpretation of Charles I's acts, upon whom and his advisers is thrown the blame f o r the civil war. 8 1 Brodie, unlike Hallam, has no words of criticism f o r the execution of Charles I, and he ends his book by denying that Charles I I acted mercifully on his Restoration. 6 2 It will be seen that Brodie was not a very generous historian nor always a judicious interpreter of the seventeenth century. He hated to give the Stuarts the benefit of any doubt. H e was not, however, a republican, but believed that those who in 1 6 4 8 favored placing one of the younger sons of Charles on the throne were wiser than those who advocated the abolition of monarchy—not of course because of any claim the Stuarts had to the throne, but on grounds of practicability and utility. 63 Cromwell's seizure of power is pictured as a conscious and deliberate usurpation resulting f r o m ambition, but is condemned less vigorously than the rule of the Stuarts. There seem to have been circumstances to palliate Cromwell's usurpation but no excuses for the Stuart despotism. 84 B0

Ibid.,

vol. i, pp. 355-356.

61

Ibid.,

vol. iv, pp. 235-236.

2

" Ibid.,

vol. iv, pp. 485-486.

83

vol. iv, pp. 237-240, 432.

Ibid.,

61 T h e r e is a f a v o r a b l e picture of Cromwell's early character. Ibid., vol. iii, pp. 490-499 and the long note beginning foot of page 499. H e is defended against the c h a r g e of excessive cruelty at Drogheda. Ibid., vol. iv, p. 256. C f . ibid., vol. iv, pp. 421, 431-432. Brodie, it may be noted here, pays very little attention to the Levellers, but speaks not unkindly of Lilburne (ibid., vol. iv, pp. 253, 3 7 7 ) . It would be too much, however, to expect a nineteenth-century W h i g to have the same degree of historical sympathy f o r E v e r a r d and his " thirty fanatics." Ibid., vol. iv, pp. 252-

253-

204

TRANSITION

IN ENGLISH

HISTORICAL

WRITING

Brodie had studied his evidence carefully, but his presentation of it left much to be desired. His style was colorless and he wrote without enough attention to arrangement and compression. His conception of history was purely political and partisan. He prosecuted a case, but did not seek to understand his characters or how, with some exceptions, the historical situations in which they found themselves had come about. While not an impassioned writer he lacked impartiality almost completely.65 He made a frontal attack upon Hume, and thereby captured some important outposts in his impetuous assault. But it was not thus, if we may change the figure, that the spell of Tory views as expressed by Hume could be lifted. Brodie's work appeared in a new edition in 1866 but not thereafter, and is no longer cited. William Godwin sought, in his History of the Commonwealth of England from its Commencement, to the Restoration of Charles the Second ( 1 8 2 4 - 2 8 ) , to trace the story of the republicans from their rise during the civil war to their extinction, as an influential group, with the Restoration. He was drawn to this subject partly because England under the Commonwealth, as the chief instance in history of a great nation experimenting with the republican form of government, seemed to him a valuable example in the study of the interesting question of what is the best form of government. But more particularly he sought " to attend to the neglected, to remember the forgotten," 66 by placing the republicans in a different light from that in which they appeared in the pages of Whig and Tory historians. T w o whole volumes 65

In the following short sentence the four important words or phrases in italics carry an invidious implication: " Placed at the head of the ecclesiastical and civil government, Laud betrayed all the presumptuous insolence of a little mind, intoxicated with undeserved prosperity." Ibid., vol. it, p. 247. 68 History of the Commonwealth of England (London, 1824-1828), vol. i, p. vi. On Godwin see also infra, pp. 246-247.

PARTY HISTORY, 1800-1817

205

were devoted to tracing the politics of the Civil War period to the death of Charles. A third treated of the Commonwealth proper, and the last described the Protectorate to the death of Oliver Cromwell in 1658. While freely and consciously expressing sentiments and sympathies, Godwin worked in a cooler spirit than Brodie. He inclined to the belief that the execution of Strafford was just and necessary but expressed " an almost invincible abhorrence to the taking away the life of man, after a set form, and in cool blood, in any case whatever." " He disapproved of the execution of Laud and passed a balanced judgment on the death of Charles. That monarch was one of the greatest criminals in all history. But the event proved that his execution did not answer the purpose intended by its authors. Not only did it not conciliate England to republican ideas, but it constituted so great a shock to ancient prejudices as to ensure defeat to the republican cause. " I am afraid, that the day that saw Charles perish on the scaffold, rendered the restoration of his family certain." as On the other hand Godwin has considerable praise for the intentions of the regicides. Deeming themselves called to perform an awful act of justice, they had, in his judgment, faced their responsibility with courage, resolution, and public spirit. Although Godwin denounced Cromwell as an hypocritical apostate who rose to power " by basely deceiving and deserting the illustrious band of patriots, with whom he had till that time been associated in the cause of liberty," 89 the History of the Commonwealth marked some progress towards an understanding of England's Iron Statesman. Censure is less conspicuous in Godwin than praise of Cromwell's good qualities and his services to the country. In foreign affairs 67

Ibid., vol. i, p. 93. Ibid., vol. ii, pp. 691-692. 99 Ibid., vol. iv, p. 597. 68

2o6

TRANSITION

IN ENGLISH

HISTORICAL

WRITING

he had raised English prestige to an unusually high point and in domestic policy sought to achieve a reformation of government. He aimed at being the father of his people, said Godwin, and every day he appeared to them more like a king, less like a simple usurper. Had he lived ten years longer, he might well have established his rule firmly enough to guarantee the succession in his own family.70 In spite of the interest such views hold for a reader the History of the Commonwealth is an unexciting book. Sometimes it descended to an almost bare listing of events or Parliamentary decisions. At other points it lapsed into abstract speculation which distracts attention whatever its intrinsic merits may be. Godwin moreover showed no appreciation whatever of the importance of economic and social affairs, nor was he an adequate historian of ideas. For these reasons, perhaps still more for the unpopular nature of his political opinions, Godwin does not seem to have been very effective in changing prevailing views of the Commonwealth period. He was, however, of importance in the history of research. He is still remembered for the new material he incorporated into his book, being the first person to make wide use of the great collection of Thomason Tracts in the British Museum and of the unprinted Order Books of the Council of State in the State Paper Office. Along with these he made copious use of the Journals of the Commons and Lords, although of course he was not the first to turn to these sources. Godwin's use of his manuscript materials was criticized by Andrew Bisset, a later historian of the Com70 A m o n g the numerous passages relating to Cromwell, reference may be made particularly to vol. ii, pp. 407-408; vol. iii, pp. 2 1 6 - 2 1 7 , 434-438; vol. iv, pp. 579-608. G o d w i n has even been spoken of as " perhaps the most vigorous champion of the Cromwellian policy that has written." C. K . A d a m s , op. cit., p. 461. This is extreme. Godwin championed the republicans, not Cromwell.

PARTY

HISTORY,

1800-1817

207

m o n w e a l t h P e r i o d , 7 1 but seventeenth-century specialists

of

the present d a y , like F i r t h and G o d f r e y D a v i e s , speak o f his w o r k w i t h g r e a t e r respect. 7 2 Macaulay

declared

Hallam's

Constitutional

History

of

England

( 1 8 2 7 ) to be the m o s t impartial b o o k he h a d e v e r

read. 7 3

B u t H a l l a m w a s certainly not impartial in t h e m o d -

ern s e n s e — i n the sense o f A c t o n ' s dictum w h e n he a d v i s e d contributors t o the Cambridge

Modern

History

to w r i t e w i t h o u t

r e v e a l i n g the c o u n t r y , the religion or the p a r t y t o w h i c h they belonged.

T o H a l l a m " the W h i g s appear t o h a v e t a k e n a

f a r m o r e c o m p r e h e n s i v e v i e w o f the nature and ends o f civil s o c i e t y ; their principle is more v i r t u o u s , m o r e flexible t o the v a r i a t i o n s o f t i m e and circumstance, more congenial t o l a r g e a n d masculine intellects."

74

H i s general picture o f E n g l i s h

constitutional development w a s in sharp contrast to the classic T o r y view.

T h e E n g l i s h g o v e r n m e n t , he maintained, h a d

a l w a y s been a limited m o n a r c h y , a l t h o u g h the constitution w a s not sharply defined, " r e d u c e d into a s y s t e m , " 7 5 the seventeenth century.

A t times, as in the

fifteenth

sixteenth centuries, there had been a r e t r o g r a d e

until and

tendency

t o w a r d s absolute m o n a r c h y ; a n d under the T u d o r s c e r t a i n special circumstances high prerogative. Tudors were

76

made possible the exercise o f a v e r y

B u t the violent, a r b i t r a r y

clearly irregular a n d illegal.

acts o f

the

Moreover

the

c o m m o n s w e r e never altogether u n m i n d f u l o f the real conon Historical

(London, 1871), pp. 304-305, 315.

71

Essays

72

C. H. Firth, in Transactions

Truth

of the Royal

ser., vol. vii (London, 1913), p. 40; G. Davies, op. 73

Critical,

Historical

and Miscellaneous

Essays

Historical cit.,

Socicty,

3rd

p. 21.

(New York, i860),

vol. i, p. 436. 74

The Constitutional

VII to the

Death

of

History George

of England II

On Hallam see also i n f r a , pp. 271-276. 75

Ibid.,

vol. i, p. 269 note.

76

Ibid.,

vol. i, pp. 42, 46-56.

from

the accession

of

Henry

(5th ed., London, 1846), vol. ii, p. 364.

208

TRANSITION

IN ENGLISH

HISTORICAL

WRITING

stitution of England. They asserted their rights with increasing vigour in the reign of Elizabeth, opposed the Stuart effort to establish despotism, until the Long Parliament in 1641 " restored and consolidated the shattered fabric " 77 of the constitution. In this connection Hallam was careful to point out, however, that the acts of this parliament, " made scarce any material change in our constitution such as it had been established and recognized under the house of Plantagenet; " 18 while on the other hand, they gave to the constitution its modern form. The later Habeas Corpus " introduced no new principle, nor conferred any right upon the subject." 79 The Revolution of 1688 may have been necessary to make the constitution secure, but not so much by changing the laws as by altering " the spirit and sentiments of the people . . . it broke the spell that had charmed the nation. It cut out by the roots all that theory of indefeasible right, of paramount prerogative, which had put the crown in continual opposition to the people." 80 Hallam's Whiggism was not only revealed in this rather anachronistic conception of the English constitution, but also in his treatment of particular men and events. He made no secret of his detestation for the Tudor despotism though able to approve of some of its achievements. His antipathy for High-Churchism was outspoken. He ridiculed the notion that the Stuarts had any lawful claims to the throne apart from the will of the people. His censure fell equally upon the Stuarts, with their propensities towards arbitrary rule, and upon the independents who leaned towards republicanism. His favor fell upon those whether of the royalist or the par77

Ibid., vol. i, p. 513.

78

Ibid., vol. i, pp. 519-520.

79

Ibid., vol. ii, p. 177.

80

Ibid., vol. ii, p. 255.

PARTY

HISTORY,

1800-1827

209

liamentary camp, who were loyal to the ideal of " the mixed government of England by king, lords, and commons." 81 Y e t while Hallam's Whiggism was clearly indicated in everything he wrote it was a very balanced form of party history that came from his pen. If he criticized Hume for seeking evidence only on one side of the question, for prejudice and unfairness, for fallacious reasoning, historical blunders and " preposterous insinuations," 82 he was equally ready to censure Brodie's exaggerations 88 and the " absurd partiality" of Coxe. 84 Mingled with his disapproval of Charles I was a recognition of the difficulties of that monarch's situation, at least in the latter part of his reign, and an occasional word on the favorable side of his character.85 So, also, great as was his admiration for the earlier achievements of the Long Parliament it was balanced by his detestation for the " violent and barbarous proceedings " 86 that marked its course after 1 6 4 1 . He loved liberty, but he did not find either its friends or its enemies concentrated in one camp during the Civil War. He refused to believe " that Falkland and Colepepper differed greatly in their constitutional principles from Whitelock and Pierpoint, or that Hertford, and Southampton were less friends to a limited monarchy than Essex and Northumberland; " 87 and he was inclined to find Parliament the aggressor in the war. Such opinions were partly due to the fact that Hallam was a staunch Conservative, admittedly no great lover of Parlia81

Ibid., vol. i, p. 557.

83

/¿'id., vol. i, pp. 4, 18, 21, 245, 253, 262 note, 276-284, 443, 507 note, 613, passim. 83

Ibid., vol. i, p. 284 note, 560 note.

84

Ibid., vol. ii, p. 428 note.

** Ibid., vol. i, pp. 452-453, 543, 605 and note, 631. 86

Ibid., vol. i, p. 597 note.

87

Ibid., vol. i, p. 564.

2io

TRANSITION

IN ENGLISH

HISTORICAL

WRITING

mentary reform and specifically opposed to the R e f o r m Bill of 1 8 3 2 , sceptical of the virtues of shorter Parliaments, confessing to a " jealous distrust of that indefinable, uncontrollable privilege of parliament, which has sometimes been asserted." 88 He was no lover of revolutions and like so many Whigs of his age was fearful of the democratic trend of modern society. Thus he recoiled from the radical acts into which their zeal sometimes led Parliamentary leaders, just as he resented the more extreme claims made by the Stuarts. But quite apart f r o m this, Hallam was not of the stuff out of which violent partisans are made. He was too sceptical, melancholy, even pessimistic, in his attitude towards human affairs to locate all wisdom and righteousness in one man or group of men. He is an example of the truth of Stubbs' remark that the devoted student of history may be a wiser man, but will be a sadder one. Equally unfavorable to the nurture of party passion was Hallam's manner of life. He retired early f r o m the B a r and was never an active participant in politics. Having sufficient means to be free from the necessity of earning an income, he devoted his full time f o r many years to study and writing, a mode of life which is not indeed incompatible with intense partisanship but certainly less likely to induce it than the rivalry of courtroom or Commons. He tells us that he terminated his history at the accession of George I I I so as to avoid " the prejudices of modern politics " to be found in the subsequent period. 89 Hallam's conception of history, finally, was elevated f a r beyond that of the service of party. F o r him history was teacher and judge, rendering the judgment of the present, with its superior knowledge and calmer emotions, upon the 88

Ibid., vol. i, p. 3 6 1 ; cf. vol. ii, pp. 201, 399-400.

89

Ibid., vol. i, p. vii.

PARTY

HISTORY,

1800-1827

211

turbulent struggles of the past. H e even regarded the judgment of history as more conclusive than that of a court of law because based in part upon evidence not available to a court or not admissible in legal procedure on technical grounds. 9 0 H e sought to consider the great events of history according to the " maxims of civil prudence " or the canons of political ethics with judicial impartiality. H e is never better than when weighing the evidence for and against this or that conclusion in some disputed event of great importance. T h e tone of such passages approximates quite closely to that of a judicial opinion. A n early example is the argument in the case of Mary, Queen of Scots. 91 Other striking instances are the discussion of the attainder of Strafford leading to a modified condemnation of that measure, 02 the very fine passage considering the " political justice " of the Civil War, 9 3 the observations on the execution of Charles 1,94 and the rather apologetic remarks on the connection between the W h i g s and France in the reign of Charles II. 9 5 Perhaps this point may be made clearer by a brief summary of his conclusions regarding the execution of Mary. He begins by laying down the opinion that her execution has been unduly censured by posterity. The evidence in favor of the charge that Mary had assented to a conspiracy against the life of Elizabeth was "not indeed irresistibly convincing, but f a r stronger that we find in many instances where condemnation has ensued." 96 T h e contention that Mary as an independent sovereign was not amenable to any English juris90

Ibid., vol. i, p. 525.

01

Ibid., vol. i. pp. 158-162.

92

Ibid., vol. i, pp. 522-530.

93

Ibid., vol. i, pp. 557-569.

94

Ibid., vol. i, pp. 644-646.

95

Ibid., vol. ii, pp. 99-105.

86

Ibid., vol. i, pp. 158-159.

212

TRANSITION

IN ENGLISH

HISTORICAL

WRITING

diction, Hallam holds somewhat questionable. Such a principle certainly did not include the right to plot against the sovereign o f a territory in which she resided, even if detained there by force. Moreover, was M a r y in any case anything more than " a titular queen, divested of every substantial right to which a sovereign tribunal could have regard? " 9 7 For these reasons her execution cannot be regarded as wholly iniquitous or unwarrantable. Nevertheless, Hallam went on to say, a good deal might be said against it. " The queen of Scots' detention in England was in violation of all natural, public, and municipal l a w ; and if reasons of state policy or precedents from the customs of princes are allowed to extenuate this injustice, it is to be asked whether such reasons and such precedents might not palliate the crime of assassination imputed to her." 98 In any event Hallam was inclined to think reasons of state, such as the maintenance of the religious establishment, might have been satisfied without the death of Mary, and a more generous sovereign than Elizabeth would not have proceeded to exact the full penalty of the law. Hallam's Constitutional History marked an epoch both in party history and in historical writing in general. Its superior learning, its depth of observation, its measured and dignified style, and its honest, balanced tone raised the level of English history to a new height. In party history it was the first great exposition of W h i g views. A t the same time it did not displace Hume completely. Hallam suffered in comparison with that far inferior historian because of his less glittering style, his legalistic tone, and his concentration on institutional history. He assumed a knowledge of general English history which many of his readers did not have. Hallam, too, was more scrupulous in his effort to get at the "Ibid., 98

vol. i, p. 161.

Ibid., loc. cit.

PARTY

HISTORY,

1800-1817

213

exact truth, which is seldom sensational. He was not the sort of historian over whom convinced partisans in either camp could w a x enthusiastic. He gave his readers strong medicine while Hume's pill was sugar-coated to the popular taste. But the very qualities that detracted from Hallam's charm for the average reader increased his claim upon the attention of students. Among the latter, accordingly, his influence was very strong. In the meantime, by 1827, Macaulay had already appeared upon the scene, destined to rival even Hume in the extent of his popularity and to end the reign of the Tory historians among the generality of readers.

CHAPTER

Vili

ROMANTICIST HISTORY,

1800-1830

IN Chapters I V and V we have already discussed certain " signs of change "—particularly a heightened appreciation of the " primitive" and of medieval civilization — that marked the growth of a Romanticist outlook in the later eighteenth century. W e shall now follow these tendencies into the early years of the next century. Sir Walter Scott has generally been regarded as the chief link between nineteenth-century Romanticism and historiography. The late Professor C. H. Herford went so 1 f a r as to say in his Age of Wordsworth that " the true Romantic historian of our period was Walter Scott." More recently Professor R . S. Rait, than whom there could be no higher authority, has borne witness to Scott's historical merits. " Sir Walter Scott," he has testified 2 " knew Scottish history better than any other man has ever known it, better than any other man ever will know it, until some mind of genius equal to his own chooses to devote the same time and attention to it; " and Professor Rait has further declared that Sir Walter had got this knowledge into his poems and novels, covering almost the whole sweep of Scotland's history, and including the high-born and the low-born, drum and trumpet, and the ordinary scenes of every-day life. 3 Thus the connection between Scott and historical writing 1

C . H . H e r f o r d , The London, 1 9 2 8 ) , p. 39. 2

of

IVordsxvorth

(3rd edition, reprinted,

" S i r Walter's Pageant of Scottish H i s t o r y , " The Sir

Quarterly 3

Age

(no. 1, Edinburgh, April, 1 9 2 7 ) , p. 14.

Ibid., p. I". 214

Walter

Scolt

ROMANTICIST

HISTORY

215

is too close to allow us to pass him by without mention. He himself bore testimony to the effect upon him of writers like Robert Henry, Strutt and Sharon Turner. 4 The Minstrelsy of the Scottish Border was intended to be a contribution to the history of Scottish manners 5 and Scott always retained his interest both in the reading of history and in the publication of materials for its study." It has even been said that his primary purpose in the poems and novels was to depict the society of the past, and that he " d i d not want to write a romance with an historical background, but . . . to give an instructive picture of the past, for which the writer did not think it beneath him to make use of a story. It may be true that this purpose was not always equally clear to the author, but it is found in his work." 7 Confirmation of this point of view is found in several of Scott's own statements. In the Preface to the Lay of the Last Minstrel he said: 8 " The Poem, now offered to the Public, is intended to illustrate the customs and manners which anciently prevailed on the Border of England and Scotland . . ." while for Waverley he claimed that " some parts of this book are not only historical romance, they are history itself, and deserve to be considered as genuine documents, although presented in informal fashion, or as evidence out of court." 9 Ivanhoe he called " a work designed to *lvanhoc, " I n t r o d u c t o r y E p i s t l e " ; M a r g a r e t Ball, Sir as a critic of literature ( N e w Y o r k , 1 9 0 7 ) , p. 126. 5 Minstrelsy cix-cx.

of

the Scottish

Border

Walter

( 1 8 0 2 ) , Introduction,

Scott

vol. i, pp.

6

T h o u g h none of Scott's contributions to the publication of seventeenth century sources was of prime importance, he is cited ten times by Davies in his Bibliography of British History, Stuart Period ( O x f o r d , 1 9 2 8 ) . r H . V i s s i n k , Scott 1 9 2 2 ) , pp. 22-23. 8 9

Quot.

Ibid.,

and

his Influence

on Dutch

Literature

(Zwolle,

p. 22.

Waverley ( E v e r y m a n edition), " I n t r o d u c t i o n , " p. v i i i ; quot. Vissink, op. cit., p. 29 note 3.

2i6

TRANSITION

IN ENGLISH

HISTORICAL

WRITING

illustrate the domestic antiquities of England and particularly of our Saxon forefathers." 10 Y e t while all this may be true, and while Scott is one of the major forces in the history of history,—the number of those who felt his influence including Thierry, Macaulav, Ranke, Barante, and Andrew Dickson White, 1 1 —this influence was greater on Continental than on English writers and then in a period later than the one with which we are dealing. Moreover, Scott had little urge for the composition of sober, formal history, for which he once declared that he had " neither time, talent, nor inclination," 12 and he turned to this species of writing only when the vein of fiction threatened to run out as that of poetry had done earlier. H e then produced his Life of Napoleon ( 1 8 2 7 ) , Tales of a Grandfather (1828-1830), and History of Scotland (1830). None of these give him high rank as an historian. O f the first Scott remarked: 1 8 " Superficial it must be, but I do not care f c r the charge. Better a superficial book which brings well and strikingly together the known and acknowledged facts, than a dull boring narrative, pausing to see farther into a mill-stone at every moment than the nature of the mill-stone admits." It was planned as a concise work like Southey's classic Nelson, but grew to the length of nine 10

Ibid., p. 22.

11

M. Ball, op. cit., p. 127, note 3; G. P . Gooch, op. cit., pp. 170, 174, 307; O. Elton, Survey of English Literature, 1780-1830, vol. ii, pp. 381382; L. Maigron, Le Roman Historique a l'époque Romantique Essai sur Íinfluence de Walter Scott ( P a r i s , 1898), esp. pp. 388 et seq. Philip H . Churchman and E . Allison Peers, A Survey of the Influence of Sir Walter Scott in Spain (Revue Hispanique, vol. liv, Paris, 1922, pp. 227310), show that Scott influenced the study of national history in Spain. 14 Letter to Archibald Constable in T . Constable, Archibald Constable and his Literary Correspondents (Edinburgh, 1873), vol. iii, p. 93. 15 J . G. Lockhart, Memoirs of the Life of Sir Walter Scott (Edinburgh, 1837-1838), vol. vii, pp. I54-IS5-

ROMANTICIST

217

HISTORY

volumes. Its importance was by no means correspondent to its size. Scott showed no appreciation of the French Revolution nor was he inspired by Napoleon as a subject. Still he recognized the exaggeration of Burke's Reflections 14 and is far more balanced in his treatment of Napoleon than was Southey in his Peninsular War. Scott acknowledged the benefits of Napoleon's rule in France and Italy, his services in establishing a regular government, schools, laws and courts of justice. 15 H e recognized the shades of gentleness and mercy in Napoleon's character. If he portrays him as a supreme egotist he also saw that his was a sublime and noble egotism identifying the welfare of France with his own. Peace having been signed, Scott was content to let the fighting cease. The Tales of a Grandfather were in four series, three dealing with Scottish history, and one with that of France. They were frankly intended to stress the picturesque 19 and while absorbingly written are only to be considered as books for children. The History of Scotland was a summary in two volumes that came out in the same series and the same year as Mackintosh's History of England. The true Romanticist historians of this time, however, were Sharon Turner and Robert Southey. Turner was born in London and principally educated at an academy conducted by the Reverend Doctor James Davies, Rector of St. James, Clerkenwell." He seems to have been something of an agnostic as a young man, but had passed this stage before he was thirty, his conversion being partly 14

Sir W . Scott, The Life of Napoleon Buonaparte vol. i, p. 278. 15

Ibid., vol. ix, pp. 337-338.

16

Sir W. Scott, Tales 1834), Preface. 17

(Edinburgh, 1827),

Gentleman's 434-436.

Magazine

of a Grandfather,

1st Series

(Philadelphia,

(vol. xxvii, new series, London, 1847), pp.

218

TRANSITION

IN ENGLISH

HISTORICAL

WRITING

the result of the impression made upon him by the titanic upheavals of the Napoleonic era. 18 A s an attorney, Turner was frequently employed by the publisher, Murray, a fact which with his own inclinations and accomplishments made him at home in the literary circles of London. His wife is said to have belonged to the Godwinian set.19 He was a longstanding friend of Robert Southey, with whom he corresponded, and a reviewer of historical works for the Quarterly in its earlier years. With Southey, he represents the conservative Romanticist group in historiography. Turner's chief work was his History of the Anglo-Saxons ( 1 7 9 9 - 1 8 0 5 ) . He had early become convinced that the Anglo-Saxon period was treated too hastily and with little attention to original sources by the generality of writers and, in the prefaces to the first and second volumes of his own History, he pleaded the cause of early English history in significant words. " We roam the most distant oceans to explore the manners of uncultivated savages, and even the philosopher reads, with interest, every description of their customs and transactions. Why should he then despise the first state and the improving progress of his Saxon ancestors? This nation exhibits the conversion of ferocious pirates, into a highly civilized, informed, and generous people —in a word, into ourselves. Can it be frivolous to depict the successive steps of this admirable change? Amid this nation, in the ninth century, a man arose who may be compared with the proudest names of antiquity without disgracing them by his society." 20 Britain had during her career 18 Sacrcd History of the World (New York, 1846), vol. i, pp. 14-15, 72; vol. iii, pp. 367-8. This late work, written f o r Turner's son, contains several biographical items. 19 29

T. Constable, op. cit., vol. i, pp. 125-127.

History of the Anglo-Saxons (London, 1799-1805), vol. ii, pp. xi-xii. Turner enlarged and changed his History in later editions, and except for

ROMANTICIST

HISTORY

219

gained glory in every quarter of the globe, in arms, in art, letters, commerce, and science. " Surely then the childhood growth of this people cannot disgrace the curiosity of their descendants." 21 In addition to this general appeal, T u r n e r directed attention to certain phases of early English history that seemed to call for more emphasis than was generally given. Greater consideration should be paid to the Anglo-Saxons before they crossed f r o m the Continent: " because to contemplate the infancy of celebrated nations is among the most pleasing occupations of h u m a n curiosity; it is peculiarly important to us, the posterity of the Anglo-Saxons, to know as much as possible of our continental ancestors." 22 T h e evidence of the ancient Britons themselves, in their relations with the invading Saxons, should be consulted through the literature now being uncovered " a f t e r a long oblivion disgraceful to our curiosity," and public opinion should urge f u r t h e r exploration of these treasures. " T h e Danish literati have given, in this respect, an example to the world. A collection like Langebek's Scriptores Rerum Danicarum medii aevi, partim hactenus inediti, should appear f r o m every country; and until such efforts are made to rescue the relics of history f r o m the destruction which has already consumed some, and is about to annihilate the rest, the literati of every country deserve to be stigmatized f o r their fatal indolence." 23 Moreover, said T u r n e r , in seeking information on Ragnar Lodbrog, to which he had been led by reading H u g h Blair's this and the four quotations immediately following, which are from the prefaces to the first and second volumes of the first edition, reference is made to the fifth edition (London, 1828) the last to appear in Turner's lifetime. 21

Ibid., vol. ii, p. xiii.

2

- Ibid., vol. i, p. iv.

2-1

Ibid., vol. i, p. vi.

220

TRANSITION

IN ENGLISH

HISTORICAL

WRITING

Critical Dissertation on the Poems of Ossian ( 1 7 6 3 ) , he discovered how valuable was the Northern literature for Anglo-Saxon history and how completely neglected by English students; " it appeared impossible to study the English annals from Egbert to William the Conqueror with any precision or intelligence, unless the Northern literature was consulted and applied." 24 The History of the Anglo-Saxons included a summary treatment of the British and Roman periods, of the Saxons before their arrival in Britain, and of the Northern peoples who later invaded England, followed by a large-scale survey of civilization to the Norman Conquest. In addition to a discussion of political, economic, social, intellectual, and religious history, Turner included analyses of poems and many texts and translations. He avoided alike the superficial depreciation of Hume and the absurd reconstructions of Whitaker and the Celto-maniacs. Rejecting Ossian he nevertheless exploited the remains of Celtic poetry uncovered by Pughe, Evans, Williams, Jones, and others, the rich stores of the Cottonian manuscripts in the British Museum, which he was the first to use extensively, the Bayeux tapestry and other sources. It is no wonder the work was received with widespread favor and so long retained its popularity. Turner's scholarship, however, suffered from serious defects, not all of which were excusable. He was not the first to bring Beowulf to public attention as he claimed to be, though he was the first to point out its significance for historical studies. His account of the story of Beowulf contained many mistakes; and worse yet he failed to correct his mistakes in later editions or even to direct his readers to the more accurate accounts that had appeared. Many of his translations were faulty and his whole treatment was un24

Ibid., vol. ii, p. vii.

ROMANTICIST

HISTORY

221

critical. 25 H e found the origin of the jury among the AngloSaxons, and said he was convinced the Witenagemot was quite like a modern Parliament in its composition although he admitted the evidence was against such a belief. 26 He had the common failing of ignorance of Continental research. This shortcoming, and his lack of criticism, were pointed out clearly by William T a y l o r of Norwich in a letter to Southey: 2 1 He has the fault of all our antiquaries, to equivalue the noble and the rabble of authorities: he should cultivate a more aristocratic taste, and not count the dunce and the genius by the head; he will else incur the reputation of pedantry and not of erudition. He has another fault,—that of being what Porson calls behindhand with his subject; Schlotzer's Northern History had settled forty years ago many points about which he is at a loss. Although he stressed rather than concealed the ferocity of the barbarians, and ridiculed those who gave an imaginary illustrious descent to the Saxons, 2 8 Turner was one of the early " Germanists " among students of English History. " Our language, our government, and our laws," he declared, " display our Gothic ancestors in every part. They live, not merely in our annals and traditions, but in our civil institutions and perpetual discourse." M Where Hume had concluded that the French element predominated in the English language Turner was anxious to show that it was " prin2 5 C. B. Tinker, The Translations ( N e w Y o r k , 1903), pp. 9-15.

of Beoivulf,

A Critical

Bibliography

O n Turner's treatment of the origins of English Government see H . J. Ford, Representative Government ( N e w Y o r k , 1924), pp. 39-46. 26

3 7 J. W . Robberds, A Memoir of the Life and Writings of the late William Taylor of Norivich (London, 1843), vol. i, p. 470. Letter to R . Southey, A u g u s t 27, 1803. 28

History

of the Anglo-Saxons,

=9 Ibid., vol. i, pp. 188-189.

5th edition, vol. i, pp. 107-110.

222

TRANSITION

IN ENGLISH

HISTORICAL

WRITING

cipally S a x o n . " 30 He believed also that the Germanic element in English life, indeed in European society as a whole, was responsible for many of its finest features. H e did not go the length of trying to show that Roman and British elements had been completely wiped out at the time of the Anglo-Saxon conquest, nor did he argue that Roman and British influences were necessarily bad; but in his emphasis on the German strain and in his partiality for the Saxons, while admitting their early barbarities, he prefigures the school that was to be so strong a generation or two later. This is clearly shown in his estimates of the late Roman Empire, the barbarian invasions, and Anglo-Saxon civilization. H e regarded the German migrations as a necessary purgative of the decadent Roman society and was insistent that the Germans had not barbarized E u r o p e ; 3 1 the Dark A g e " was their misfortune, not their fault." 3 i T o o much enthusiasm had been bestowed on classical civilization, which at its best nurtured many superstitions and barbarous practices, and in which the benefits of culture had been enjoyed only by the few while the many were as ignorant and uncared for as at any stage of history. Moreover the Roman world had passed its peak before the era of invasions. There must be stagnation, further decline, or " some extensive revolution " to infuse new vigor into the social frame. This the Germans brought, and hence there should be an end to " our dark and querulous descriptions " of the period of their in30

Ibid., vol. ii, p. 440 and Appendix I. Hume ( H i s t o r y of England, vol. i, pp. 259-260), speaks of '' that mixture of French which is at present to be found in the English tongue, and which composes the greatest and best part of our language." 31

History

of the Anglo-Saxons,

vol. i, pp. 130, 2 5 1 - 2 5 2 ; vol. iii, pp.

2-5, 430. 32 History of England from the Norman Conquest to 1509 (London, 1814-1823), vol. i, p. 3 7 9 ; after the first edition this work was entitled, History of England during the Middle Ages.

ROMANTICIST

vasions. 3 3

223

HISTORY

Especially so because comparatively speaking the

Germans were not bloodthirsty in their attack, a fact proved, in his estimation, b y Salvian's statement that many R o m a n s preferred l i f e a m o n g the barbarians to the oppressions of the R o m a n Empire.

M a n y single wars of antiquity had been

attended by greater misery than w a s brought by the overthrow of the W e s t e r n Empire. It will be seen, therefore, that even though T u r n e r appears to have regarded the S a x o n s as about the fiercest, most uncivilized, of Germans, his angle of vision predisposed him to give a sympathetic picture of the centuries of their rule in England.

T o be sure, he warned his readers against the

poetic dream of the A n g l o - S a x o n period as a kind of paradise, fit home f o r the A n g l o - S a x o n freemen, " lord of the lion heart and eagle e y e , "

34

but he had an obvious enthusiasm

for their healthy, r o u g h society.

I f learning w a s at low

point the A n g l o - S a x o n s were nevertheless equal to the rest of contemporary E u r o p e and superior in certain respects to antiquity.

M a n y o f their superstitions were really derived

f r o m antiquity, while they also preserved much o f value in the classical heritage, and in some respects made contributions of their own.

Bede, f o r example, " collected and taught

more natural truths with f e w e r errors than any R o m a n book on the same subjects had accomplished.

T h u s his w o r k dis-

plays an advance not a rétrogradation of human knowledge. 3 5 T h i s estimate of Bede, which illustrates so well T u r n e r ' s predilection for the S a x o n s , has been pronounced an e x a g geration by a modern authority 011 the history of science, 36 and it would perhaps be difficult to sustain T u r n e r in his 33

Ibid.,

34

vol. iii, p. 4.

History

35

Ibid.,

88

L y n n T h o r n d i k e , History

of the Anglo-Saxons,

vol. iii, p. 86.

vol. iii, p. 430.

Y o r k , 1 9 2 3 ) , v o l . i, p. 634.

of Magic

and Experimental

Science

(New

TRANSITION

IN ENGLISH

HISTORICAL

WRITING

belief that the A n g l o - S a x o n intellectuals progressed in many respects beyond the ancients, but the modern authority already referred to would probably agree with the general contention that much of the darkness of the " Dark " ages, in England and elsewhere, was really derived f r o m antiquity." T h e present trend of anthropology would also bear out Turner in his view that the cultural backwardness of AngloSaxon England in comparison, let us say, with Mohammedan Spain, arose from lack of opportunity, not lack of talent. " They had to fight for several generations to win their territorial possessions, and afterwards from their mutual independence, to defend themselves against each other. T h e whole frame of their society, and the main direction of their spirit and education, was essentially, because necessarily, warlike." 38 In such a society intellectual pursuits could only be obstacles to success in life, except for the clergy to whom some knowledge of Latin at least, was essential. If not preeminent in literary and scientific pursuits, Turner maintained, the Anglo-Saxons achieved greatness along lines suitable to their circumstances, especially in war and government. They laid the foundations of England and deserved the lasting regard of their descendants. T o arouse a " patriotic curiosity " about their deeds was the main aim of Turner's History and it was with pride that he declared in 1820, looking back upon his early labours, " his favorite desire has been fulfilled—a taste for the history and remains of our Great Ancestors has revived, and is visibly increasing." 3 7 P r o f e s s o r T h o r n d i k e says (ibid., vol. ii, p. 979) of the Middle A g e s in g e n e r a l : " T h e y had to struggle against a huge burden of error and superstition w h i c h Greece and Rome and the Arabs handed down to them; yet they must try to assimilate what was of value in Aristotle, Galen, Pliny, Ptolemy, and the rest." 38

History

of the Anglo-Saxons,

vol. ii, p. 5.

P r e f a c e to the third edition, dated March, 1820, and reprinted in the fifth edition, pp. v-viii. 39

ROMANTICIST

HISTORY

225

This work on the Anglo-Saxons was followed in due course by a History of England from the Norman Conquest to 1509 ( 1 8 1 4 - 1 8 2 3 ) , a far less significant book. Turner did not have the same long-standing enthusiasm for the Middle Ages, his command of the materials was less, and there were more competitors. Moreover, he was ill during part of the time he was composing the volumes.40 Yet they were well received and deserved to be, for they exhibited genuine scholarship and correct ideas of historical study. " Modern criticism," the author declared, " averse alike to fable and to rhetoric, wishes history neither to defame nor to blazon; but to explore and narrate the simple truth, whereever it is penetrable, or attainable, unvarnished and untwisted, with no disingenuous suppression and without any political subserviency. On this principle, the present history has been attempted." 41 He disclaimed any competition with Rapin-Thoyras, Hume, or Henry, but expressed a desire to incorporate materials they had ignored, and believed that " standing on the vantage ground of the nineteenth century, some views might be taken of the great stream of time which has preceded, in parts more comprehensive, in parts more picturesque; and, on the whole, more just and faithful, than had hitherto been sketched." 42 Most significantly he viewed the Middle Ages not as a period of barbarism, but as " that period which has been the least studied and the most negligently written; but within which our political relation, our religion, literature, language, manners, laws, and constitution, have been chiefly formed." 43 Some points in Turner's organization and selection of History of England from the Norman vol. iii, P r e f a c e . 41

Ibid., vol. iii, p. 398.

42

Ibid., vol. i, p. v.

43

Ibid., vol. ii, p. iii.

Conquest to 1509

(1814-1823),

226

TRANSITION

IN ENGLISH

HISTORICAL

WRITING

material were admirable, among them his chapters linking English with continental history, his elaborate discussion of literature, including vernacular poetry, of the development of the language, and of religion. He continued to show great interest in manners and customs, but he did not complete his design of giving a whole volume to economic and social history. His appreciation of the Crusades included respect for their motives as well as a recognition of their results, and he paid warm tribute to the work of the papacy, although a strong Protestant feeling is clearly evident. Some profoundly important points are missed. For example, although his sketch of William the Conqueror's reign touches upon the social revolution produced by the Norman Conquest it is mainly given up to William's wars, while such matters as the Domesday Book and the Salisbury Oath are barely mentioned.44 It was a work based on good sources and reflecting the new interest in medieval civilization for its own sake and not merely as an introduction to modern times; but it was in no sense a revelation of new materials such as the History of the Anglo-Saxons had been. Although the Modern History of England 45 (1826-29) was regarded as a Protestant antidote to Lingard, and was certainly influenced by the religious controversies of the early nineteenth century, it was also in part the fruition of a long entertained desire to carry English history to 1603. 46 In the sixteenth century Turner was more than ever out of his proper field, but he still sought to write as far as possible from documents and contemporary sources, using later writ44

Ibid., vol. i, chap. iv.

45

This appeared in 2 parts quarto: ( 1 ) The History of the Reign of Henry the Eighth: comprising the political history of the commencement of the English Reformation; ( 2 ) The history of the reigns of Edward the Sixth, Mary and Elizabeth (London, 1826-29). 40

Ibid., vol. i, Preface.

ROMANTICIST

HISTORY

ers only when they were based on original materials no longer in existence. He did not attempt, however, to write a complete history of the sixteenth century, but merely to throw light on dark places, and in accordance with this principle he did not give a full narrative o f so important an event as the dissolution o f the monasteries on the ground that it was already well known. There was less said than formerly about non-political matters, and political history itself was treated in an episodical, even perfunctory, manner. A brief summary of Turner's most characteristic ideas of the sixteenth century may best give the measure of his book. He saw that Greek literature had been introduced into Italy " above fifty years before the capture of Constantinople by the Turks," 47 and that in any case the mere revival of classical literature could not account for the great change of the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries. He recognized that the Reformation was far more than a political movement and that it could not be adequately explained by the " passions " of Luther. Back o f it lay political, economic, social, intellectual and religious forces, complex in their nature and their consequences, coming to a head in the religious revolution, so that under the title " Reformation," in his view, one might include all the events of the century. It was " the greatest concussion that human society has received, between the abruption of the Roman Empire and the late French Revolution." 48 Luther was its creature as well as its leader and without him it would as certainly have occurred. Turner gives, as we might expect, only the conventional Anglican view of Luther, recognizing his greatness but stressing his weaknesses. H e is, o f course, very sure of the benefits o f the Reformation to England, but he recognized that the Protestants were intolerant like the Catholics. O f the Reformers 47

Ibid., vol. ii, p. 3.

46

Ibid., vol. ii, p. 71.

228

TRANSITION

IN ENGLISH

HISTORICAL

WRITING

under Edward V I he said: " Their persecutions proved that they differed from their adversaries more in the verbal faith and in the external ceremony than in the spirit, the feeling, and the action. But that dissimilarity cannot be great which appears only in the arithmetical number of its victims." 19 H e was surprisingly kindly in his treatment of Mary, crediting her with a desire to avoid the persecution to which she was driven by her " ecclesiastical instigators." 50 Turner's view of Henry V I I I is of some interest because of its possible influence on Froude, who tells us he had read Turner carefully. 51 The latter attempted to paint a more favorable portrait than was common in the eighteenth century. The real Henry, he said, was frank, honorable, bold, a thoroughly good king if a little too much inclined to display. H e was flattered and used by Wolsey, the villain of Turner's piece, and the shock of discovering the duplicity of this minister in whom he fully trusted destroyed good K i n g Henry's confidence in everyone. Meanwhile, the religious struggle had coarsened English public life in the same way, though to a lesser degree, as the Marian and Sullan straggles coarsened the politics of Rome. Both papal and anti-papal sides resorted to doubtful devices, more arbitrary measures, Henry among the rest. He lost his fine qualities and ended a tyrant. There is something to be said for aspects of this reconstruction. Historians have often pointed out the contrast between the young and the old King. But Turner was much too anxious to defend his hero. A s Hallam said, 52 he went " upon the strange principle of exalting that tyrant's reputation at the expense of every one of his victims, to whatever 49

Ibid., vol. ii, p. 195.

60

Ibid., vol. ii, p. 247.

J. A . Froude, Short Studies vol. iv, p. 166. 51

52

Constitutional

History

on Great Subjects

of England,

( N e w Y o r k , 1868-83),

vol. i, p. 32, note.

ROMANTICIST

HISTORY

229

party they may have belonged," even to the extent of defending the attainder of Sir Thomas More. Turner's treatment of history was affected not merely by his contact with literary Romanticism and his interest in research but also by his doctrine of the inevitability of human progress under Divine guidance. He saw a steady tendency towards progress in past history, though not every age was superior to its immediate predecessor, and was as convinced as any perfectibilist that the same progress would continue into the indefinite future through the agency of God. To some extent it is even true, as the writers of his obituary notice in the Gentleman's Magazine said, that " the grand leading principle of all his historical works [was] that minute providential agency, and actual superintending direction of all affairs by the Almighty, which it was his delight to trace." 53 From this religious idea he doubtless gained a greater sense of the unity and the continuity of history, and it was perhaps also partly responsible for his willingness to consider each age in terms of its own possibilities and attainments, marking a certain stage in the revelation of God's purpose, rather than constantly to be judging the past by the yardstick of eighteenth-century rationalism. For him history was a single process, an unfolding of human destiny from the Fall of Man to his own day, and he was often satisfied to observe and describe this process without frequent judgments on the baseness of one culture or the excellence of another. But if he was less of a judge than was fashionable among rationalistic writers, he was no less a pedagogue, constantly drawing the appropriate moral lesson for his readers, an unfortunate tendency that grew stronger in his later years. T h e chief danger of theocratic conceptions of history is probably the proneness to refer particular events to direct 53

Gentleman's Magazine

(vol. xxviii, new series, London, 1847), p. 43S.

230

TRANSITION

IN

ENGLISH

HISTORICAL

WRITING

supernatural agency. Although Turner criticizes medieval thinkers for this fault (he also criticizes modern thinkers for the opposite fault of ascribing events solely to natural causes), he himself is not free from it. He says, it is true, that God intervenes directly only when secondary causes are insufficient to secure his ends, but examination reveals a surprising number as well as a curious assortment of instances where Divine intervention is postulated. The list includes the triumphs of the Arabs, Saxons, and Normans, the early success and ultimate failure of the Crusades, the training of Titus in Britain, the career of Lanfranc, the service in Latin, the Turkish conquests in the Balkans, and the escape of France from her sixteenth-century troubles. 54 Among secondary causes Turner instanced racial or national character and environment. It was characteristic of eighteenth-century thought that he should regard environment as more important generally than inborn traits, although in his observation on the part played by Government in political progress, this is not the case. The passage, in this respect, and because it reflects the tendency to a laissez-faire attitude, is worth quoting: 5 5 T h e progress of political society is indeed always tending to advance ; it only asks in general from its government the absence of all imposed impediments: let its own energies act unrestricted and unspoiled, and the general laws of human nature will impel it perpetually forward in its meliorating career.

In spite of his religious zeal Turner had a good many affinities with the era of Enlightenment, sharing its confidence in ** History 418.

History

of the Anglo-Saxons, of

England

from

vol. i, pp. 83, 1 2 0 - 1 2 1 ; v o l . ii, pp. 4 1 7 the Norman

Conquest

pp. 6 1 - 6 2 , 297-299, 4 0 1 - 4 0 2 , 4 1 2 , 4 7 2 ; v o l . ii, pp. 19-20. of England, r,r>

History

to 1509, Modem

v o l . i, History

v o l . i, pp. 2 4 0 - 2 4 1 ; v o l . ii, p. 7 1 . of England

from

the Norman

Conquest

to 1509, vol. i, p. 362.

ROMANTICIST

231

HISTORY

the intellect, its conviction of the intellectual supremacy of modern times, its humanitarian condemnation of war, intolerance, and cruelty. 58 In one of his attempts at poetry he censured W o r d s w o r t h f o r having given " feeling-thoughtmeaning and voice " to inanimate nature, and f o r having taken his themes f r o m lowly l i f e : 5 7 But why the quaint in humble life select And mystic meanings in rude minds detect and counselled him to Waste not thy genius on a vulgar tale.*8 When he praised S i r Walter Scott it was not, as we might expect, f o r have given a sense of the glamor of medieval times, but f o r kindling in his readers " favourable impressions and recollections of the best sympathies, good principles, a spirit of rectitude and honor, and an increased desire f o r the reputation and advantage which our most laudable sensibilities will most amply bestow." 50 Assuming that this passage makes sense, it hardly seems the sort of approval we should expect f r o m one Romanticist to another. Y e t Turner undoubtedly marks the beginning of a new era in historiography. His abiding zeal f o r Icelandic and A n g l o - S a x o n studies, his attitude towards primitive peoples, and his religious interpretation of history are the clearest examples of this. His appreciation of Irish " sensibility," of r

" History of the Anglo-Saxons, vol. i, pp. 32, 178, 456-7; vol. ii, pp. 8, 256. History of England from the Norman Conquest to 1509, vol. i, pp. 325, 336, 371; vol. ii, p. 36; vol. iii, pp. 234, 300, 374. The Modern History of England (London, 1826-29), vol. ii, pp. 138, 154, note 3, 180. 57

Prolusions on the present greatness of Britain; on modern and on the present aspect of the World (London, 1819), p. 115. 58 59

poetry;

Ibid., p. 1 1 7 .

The History of England 1830), vol. v, p. 254.

during the Middle Ages

(3rd ed., London,

232

TRANSITION

IN ENGLISH

HISTORICAL

WRITING

Russian " originality of character, institutions, and political position," his generous enthusiasm for the pleasing qualities of different peoples are characteristically Romanticist; while his vigorous advocacy of the collection and publication of the sources of national history, his generalized pride in all things English, and incidental expressions of opinion like his criticism of the evils of the factory system and his approval of unemployment agencies, all show what a watershed of opinion the years around 1800 were. 60 Perhaps we can best describe Turner's place by saying that in the motivation of his studies, in his choice of subject, and to a large extent in his manner of treatment, he belongs to the nineteenth rather than to the eighteenth century. It is nevertheless easy to account for Turner's disappearance from favor. He never showed that command of his material characteristic of Gibbon or Hallam. Nor did he realize the importance of the history of institutions with which scholars have become increasingly concerned. The constitutional parts of his book were negligible, and he so completely misunderstood the sixteenth century as to make the sovereign responsible to his " cabinet." 61 His sense of proportion was so faulty that he gave as much attention to Richard III as to Henry VII. 8 2 Moreover success made him self-conscious and his style, never good, grew too ambitious 6 0 Turner's views on the factory system are to be found in his late w o r k The Sacred History of the World ( N e w Y o r k , 1846), vol. iii, pp. 423-425. W i t h reference to Turner's connection with Romanticism, we may add that he acknowledged his debt to H o m e T o o k e ( H i s t o r y of the Anglo-Saxons, vol. ii, p. 420) and quoted Herder shortly a f t e r the appearance (1800) of the English translation of the Outlines of the Philosophy of the History of Man. History of the Anglo-Saxons (first edition, London, 1799-1805), vol. ii, p. 193, note 14. 81

Modern

History

of England,

vol. i, p. 168.

T u r n e r seems to have been rather fond of Richard I I I and devoted one of his poems (Richard III, A Poem, London, 1845) to giving at more correct popular idea of that monarch. 82

ROMANTICIST

HISTORY

233

as time went on. H e is capable of referring to salt placed in a captive's wounds as " the saline stimulant," while spring is for him " the vernal season." 68 Sometimes his gaucheries are beyond description, for what shall we say of a man who contrasts the ostentation of Wolsey with the modesty of God as revealed in creation," and solemnly compares the English Parliament to a " superintending Providence." 65 Turner's works were on the whole very well received, but adverse comment grew with the later volumes. Critics were especially annoyed by the elaborate over-style and pious moralizing so much more noticeable than earlier. One reviewer went so far as to doubt if ten persons in the whole kingdom had read through the seven hundred quarto pages on Henry VIII. 6 6 But none the less Turner was long esteemed and influential. Southey thought he had written the best history of the day, while Scott, Hallam, and Prescott spoke of him with respect.67 He was read carefully by Froude, is thought to have influenced Tennyson, and was certainly one element in producing a new treatment of the sources of national history. 88 Though not a great historian, nor even a firstclass one, he was by no means a negligible figure. 63 History of the Anglo-Saxons, England, vol. i, p. 507. 6i

Modern

History

65

History

of the Anglo-Saxons,

88

See the criticisms quoted in Allibone's Critical

Literature

of England,

vol. i, p. 515.

Modern

History

of

vol. i, pp. 142-143. vol. iii, p. 179. Dictionary

of

English

(London, 1859-71).

8 7 F o r Southey and Scott and T u r n e r see the Dictionary of National Biography article. H a l l a m speaks respectfully of T u r n e r in his own Middle Ages, vol. iii, p. 471, note, and p. 482, note, among other places. Prescott refers to " the circumspect and conscientious Sharon Turner " in his Biographical and Critical Miscellanies (London, 1845), p. 89. 8 8 O n Froude's reading of Turner, see supra, note 51. F o r an instance of the use of Turner's History of the Anglo-Saxons, by Tennyson see Notes and Queries, N o . 189 ( N i n t h Series, London, A u g u s t 10, 1901), pp. 117-118. Tennyson apparently derived the epithet " t h e truth-teller"

234

TRANSITION

IN ENGLISH

HISTORICAL

WRITING

W i t h T u r n e r it is natural to associate his close friend R o b e r t Southey.

O n e thinks of Southey as a poet w h o m

f e w read today, but he w a s also a voluminous writer o f histories and expected to be remembered mainly as a historian, especially as the historian o f Portugal. 8 8

It is one of the

ironies of a tragic career, that this History

of Portugal,

the

dream of Southey's youth, his labor of love through the years of maturity and the last resource of his age, w a s never completed ; and equally ironical that of the histories he did write, those

from

which

he

confidently

expected

immortality

gather dust on the shelves of the larger libraries, while the others, such as his Nelson

and Wesley,

are perhaps more

frequently read f o r their style than their matter. T h e idea of a History

of Portugal

dated back to Southey's

first visit to that c o u n t r y ; thereafter it is mentioned

fre-

quently in his letters and appears in the very last one given in the W a r t e r collection. 70

It w a s to be a massive w o r k ,

comparable to the pyramids in solidity and endurance, and like a great palace in extent and beauty.

Equal to Gibbon in

scholarship, it was to be superior in the spirit and correctness f o r A l f r e d f r o m Turner. Stephens says in his Life of Freeman (1895), p. 114, that " T o Sharon T u r n e r belongs the credit of having awakened some interest in these neglected materials [the A n g l o - S a x o n manuscripts] which led to an inquiry being made about the matter in Parliament in 1800, and the appointment of a Commission ' to methodize, regulate, and digest the records ' " ; but I do not know upon what evidence so strong a statement may be rested. 6 9 C. C. Southey ( e d . ) , Life and Correspondence of the late Robert Southey (London, 1849-50), vol. iv, p. iii; vol. vi, p. 182. On Southey see also supra, pp. 177-181. 7 0 F o r references to the History of Portugal, upon which the material of the next three paragraphs is based, see J. W . Robberds, op. cit., vol. i. pp. 342, 429; vol. ii, pp. 76-77. J. W . W a r t e r ( e d . ) , Selections from the Letters of Robert Southey (London, 1856), vol. i, pp. 99-100, 115-116, 132135, 140, 145 et seq., 159-160, 208-209, 224, 233, 239, 246-247, 337, 364, 406; vol. ii, p. 96; vol. iii, pp. 174, 325-326; vol. iv, pp. 220, 574-575.

ROMANTICIST

HISTORY

235

o f its philosophical a n d r e l i g i o u s outlook.

Southey hoped

t o secure f r o m it a n i n c o m e l a r g e e n o u g h t o f r e e h i m f r o m t h e necessity o f h a c k w o r k , b u t he never f o r g o t that h e w a s b u i l d i n g f o r the a g e s , a n d w a s ready w i t h o u t hesitation t o sacrifice i m m e d i a t e r e w a r d s f o r the sake o f eternal f a m e . T h e History

w a s t o be d i v i d e d into three parts, c o n s i s t i n g

o f separate accounts o f P o r t u g a l and her A f r i c a n possessions, her A s i a t i c conquests, and B r a z i l .

A t first S o u t h e y t h o u g h t

he could complete the w o r k in three, possibly f o u r , q u a r t o s , but his scale g r e w l a r g e r a n d the one p a r t he did p r o d u c e , the History quartos.

of

Brazil,

w a s itself published in three

giant

O n e f u r t h e r v o l u m e , o n the domestic h i s t o r y o f

P o r t u g a l , seems to h a v e been finished and rejected by L o n g m a n s ; it has n o w been lost. S o u t h e y ' s letters tell us a g o o d deal a b o u t this p r o j e c t e d work.

H e planned t o pass o v e r the " G o t h i c " a g e s in s u m -

m a r y f a s h i o n , dealing w i t h their manners rather than political h i s t o r y , and t o place his emphasis on the g l o r i o u s d a y s o f d i s c o v e r y and empire.

F o r the later period o f

Portugese

history he expresses small respect and to it w o u l d p r o b a b l y have paid slight attention.

T h e narrative w a s to be based, he

said, o n first hand sources a n d each v o l u m e w a s to h a v e a critical discussion o f authorities.

O n one occasion, indeed,

at an early stage in his w o r k , S o u t h e y announced an intention o f r e a d i n g all the chroniclers o f S p a i n and

Portugal;

but the citations in his letters show h o w frequently he w a s working

at s e c o n d a r y

Portugal

w a s to include a g o o d deal about S p a i n also since

accounts.

F i n a l l y , his History

of

S o u t h e y r e g a r d e d the t w o peoples as m o r a l l y and intellectually one. A f t e r S o u t h e y h a d been w o r k i n g at his Portugal

f o r some

t w e n t y y e a r s his f r i e n d s b e g a n to u r g e h i m to publish a p a r t of w h a t he had done, s u g g e s t i n g a r o u n d 1806 the section on B r a z i l , a c o u n t r y in w h i c h public interest had been a r o u s e d

236

TRANSITION

IN ENGLISH

HISTORICAL

WRITING

by the removal of the royal family thereto. Accordingly, the History of Brazil was pushed to completion and appeared in three volumes, 1810-19. Southey regarded it as his finest achievement and there is much to be said for this opinion. It was a work of great labor and solid learning, based in large part on an independent study of manuscripts. It included accounts of the discoveries, of the manners and customs of savage tribes, of the European colonists, the work of the missionaries, especially the Jesuits in Paraguay, the progress of Brazil and a description of its state at the opening of the nineteenth century. This last enormous chapter on the state of Brazil in 1809 is a most impressive and interesting summary. 71 Southey had never visited South America, but his enthusiasm for the continent was unbounded, 72 his industry colossal, and no work comparable to this in scope and scholarship had yet appeared in English at least. 73 Unfortunately not all the work dealt with social history and in spite of the clear, vigorous style of which Southey was master one grows wearied by the tremendous mass of material often relating to unimportant topics not fully subordinate to any great design. Southey himself admitted that the connection in his history was frequently only chronological and anticipated but a moderate appreciation from his readers. A less excusable defect was his " r i g i d and blind anti-Romanism " 74 which crops out with disconcerting regularity and is naturally a great drawback in a history of a 71

History

72

of Brasil

(London, 1810-1819), vol. iii, pp. 696-879.

Ibid., vol. i, p. 330.

T h e r e had been several w o r k s describing voyages, but practically no attention to Brazilian history in English. I do not know of any w o r k between Charles B r o c k w e l l ' s Natural and Political History of Portugal 73

to which is added. The History of Brazil... (London, 1726) Andrew Grant's slight History of Brazil (London, 1809). 74

O . Elton, Survey

of English

Literature,

1780-1830, vol. ii, p. 11.

and

ROMANTICIST

HISTORY

237

Catholic country. A t the same time he pays high tribute to the Catholic missionaries and his picture of the Jesuit society in Paraguay marks a high point.75 He is a frank admirer of that order, declaring that they were actuated solely by the highest motives of service to God and their fellow men in South America. 76 They were the only protectors of the natives against rapacious and dishonest lay officials. Their expulsion was a most unwise and iniquitous though wellintentioned measure in Southey's eyes, and he says so in no uncertain terms. He could properly pride himself on the spirit in which he had handled this important part of his task. The attention given to savage life is a link between Southey's poetic interests and his History of Brazil. But when dealing with primitive peoples as they actually exist he shows none of that tendency to idealization which is found in a poem like the Tale of Paraguay. It has been well said that Southey knew too much about savages to make " noble savages " out of them.77 All we can learn from such people, he explains, is a knowledge of herbs and the habits of life by which they survive in climates strange to us. Nor does he idealize the European settlers any more than the native inhabitants. In fact he apologizes for his subject as one which will arouse disgust and anger more often than exalted sentiments. " I have to speak of savages so barbarous that little sympathy can be felt for any sufferings which they endured, and of colonists in whose triumphs no joy will be taken, because they added avarice to barbarity; . . . ignoble men, carrying on an obscure warfare, the consequences of which have been greater than were produced by the conquests of Alexander or Charlemagne, and will be far more lasting." 78 75

History of Brazil, vol. ii, pp. 330-380.

76

Ibid., vol. ii, p. 361.

77

H. N. Fairchild, The Noble Savage

78

History of Brazil, vol. i, pp. 1-2.

(New Y o r k , 1928), p. 209.

238

TRANSITION

IN ENGLISH

HISTORICAL

WRITING

It is, therefore, the importance of Brazilian history, rather than a n y t h i n g splendid about it, upon which Southey t h r o w s emphasis.

B u t that his interest w a s keen is obvious w h e n

one thinks of the u n f l a g g i n g zeal with which he worked on through 2300 quarto pages. F r o m Brazil, Southey turned to religious history, a field in which he produced t w o w o r k s of which some mention will be made.

F o r the student of literature, the Life

of

Wesley

( 1 8 2 0 ) is interesting as a vivid b i o g r a p h y ; for the historian it is significant because one of the first attempts to place W e s l e y and the rise of Methodism in historical perspective as phenomena to be explained by the course of English history and w o r t h y o f investigation quite apart f r o m one's personal attitude.

It is no small part of Southey's claim to

remembrance as an historian that he grasped this essential fact.

H e placed W e s l e y in the line of the leaders of " great

moral and intellectual revolutions," like St. Francis of Assisi, Luther, L o y o l a , and Voltaire.

" T h e Emperor Charles V ,

and his rival of France, appear at this day infinitely insignificant, if w e compare them with Luther and L o y o l a ; and there m a y come a time when the name o f W e s l e y will be more generally k n o w n , and in remoter regions of the globe, than that of Frederick or of Catherine."

79

Such a sentence, when compared with Robertson's estimate of the sixteenth century, is a measure of the transformation of historical outlook.

S o is Southey's deeper sense of the

manner in which the " great moral and political revolutions " find their explanation in the long continuing d r i f t of history rather than in the appearance of great leaders.

L i k e Turner,

he believed that leaders were men w h o knew how to respond to conditions which they did not themselves create. 79

The

Life

of

Wesley;

(I-ondon, 1820), vol. i, p. 3.

and

the

rise

and

progress

of

Methodism

ROMANTICIST

HISTORY

239

But in all stirring seasons, when any great changes are to be operated, either in the sphere of human knowedge or of human actions, agents enough are ready to appear; and those men who become for posterity the great land marks of their age, receive their bias from the times in which they live, and the circumstances in which they are placed, before they themselves give the directing impulse. It is apparent that though the Wesleys should never have existed, Whitefield would have given birth to Methodism. 80 In a significant phrase, Southey called the Methodists " a distinct people, an imperium in imperio." 81 H e traced their rise directly to the depressed and abandoned state of the English masses—that other nation so often commented on by observers—who had been Catholic in the Middle Ages, Protestant since the Reformation, but never more than nominally Christian because no one had given adequate attention to their lot. Abandoned by the Established Church they remained sunk in vice and misery until Wesley came to them. He had done much to work a moral revolution among them, and had certainly awakened them into life with consequences that no one could foresee, but sure to be profound in the long run. It must not be supposed, of course, that Southey was a Methodist sympathiser. P a r t of the stress he laid on the probable significance in history of Wesley's work arose f r o m his fear of the political consequences, the stimulus to revolution, of encouraging the habit of association among the common people. Although he admitted that Wesley had insisted on civil loyalty, he regarded the Established Church as essential to the state and was apt to confuse adherence to the one with loyalty to the other. In his eyes, religious dissent was near allied to political dissent, and in any case likely 80

Ibid., vol. i, pp. 153-154-

81

Ibid., vol. i, p. 1.

240

TRANSITION

IN ENGLISH

HISTORICAL

WRITING

to lead to unbelief. Nothing could be more alien to his temperament than " enthusiasm " in religion. He could see that complex forces must have led to a moral revolution like the Reformation or the rise of Methodism, but he could not understand the complexities of the inner spiritual life or the experience of conversion in a man like Wesley. He explained such phenomena by physical c a u s e s — " the state of the pulse or the stomach " — a n d at first gave " ambition " as the key to Wesley's career, although he withdrew this charge when pressed by critics. 82 The Brazil and the Life of Wesley are Southey's chief claims to the title of historian. The Book of the Church ( 1 8 2 4 ) was really a part of his campaign against political and social unrest. A rapid survey of Anglican Church history, it showed a strong bias against Roman Catholics and Puritans. Southey sought to recall his countrymen to their allegiance to the Establishment by showing the temporal and spiritual blessings they had derived from it. He loved the Anglican Church as a truly English product and as the guardian of the Constitution. We owe to it our moral and intellectual character as a nation; much of our private happiness, much of our private strength. Whatever should weaken it, would in the same degree injure the common weal; whatever should overthrow it, would in sure and immediate consequence bring down the goodly fabric of that Constitution, whereof it is a constituent and necessary part. If the friends of the Constitution understand this as clearly as 8 3 See the Introduction to M . H . Fitzgerald's edition of the Life of Wesley ( O x f o r d , 1925), vol. i, pp. i x - x i . R. Watson's Observations on Southey's " Life of Wesley " (1820) seems to me a better criticism than M r . Fitzgerald will allow {op. cit., vol. i, p. v i i i ) . W a t s o n , a Methodist clergyman, tried to impale Southey, a devout Anglican, on the horns of a dilemma by demonstrating that the natural causes used to explain away the spiritual phenomena of Wesley's l i f e and of Methodism might with equal validity be used against all branches of Christianity.

ROMANTICIST

HISTORY

241

its enemies, and act upon it as consistently and as actively, then will the Church and State be safe, and with them the liberty and the prosperity of our country. 88 This passage reflects the attitude with which Southey approached not only the history of England, but history in general. His bias against Roman Catholicism was fundamental and it is no small tribute to the strength of his historical sense that in spite of this bias he could appreciate as fully as he did the services of Roman Catholicism in history, of the monasteries in the Middle Ages and the Jesuits in Paraguay especially. But it was a poor feeling with which to undertake Church History and we are not surprised at the violent controversy into which the Book of the Church plunged its author. Nor does this attitude make us regret the failure to carry through his project for a history of the Monastic Orders. Even if he had paid tribute to their services in civilizing Europe, there would probably have been a disproportionate emphasis on abuses, vice and corruption. Enough has now been said to enable us to arrive at a general estimate of Southey as an historian. The History of Portugal, " my great History ", as Southey fondly designated it, would undoubtedly have been of considerable importance; but it seems clear that in history as in poetry Southey would never have risen to the stature of greatness. Full of impressive schemes and noble ideals, as he was, there were nevertheless basic weaknesses in his scholarship and methods. One of these was the rapidity with which he worked, a facility that made it possible for him to support a large family by the pen, but that went beyond the speed at which his mind was able to function adequately in criticism of his own production. It was not only economic necessity that made him produce so much; he was by nature a writer rather than a 83

The Book of the Church (London, 1824), vol. ii, p. 528.

TRANSITION

IN ENGLISH

HISTORICAL

WRITING

thinker or scholar, a n d his inclination w a s t o turn e v e r y scrap o f i n f o r m a t i o n , e v e r y idea, into a n article or b o o k . H e h i m s e l f s a w h o w d i f f e r e n t C o l e r i d g e w a s in this respect, a n d w a s inclined to be impatient o f his f r i e n d ' s lack o f p r o duction, little r e a l i z i n g h o w d i f f e r e n t l y posterity w o u l d r a t e their genius.

G i v e C o l e r i d g e a n idea a n d he w o u l d

walk

a b o u t r u m i n a t i n g on it and d r e a m i n g o f it until the a l c h e m y o f his m i n d had t r a n s f o r m e d it into s o m e t h i n g f a r r i c h e r than the crude ore w i t h w h i c h he began.

In the m e a n t i m e ,

S o u t h e y w o u l d h a v e made a book, full o f f o r c e and c r y s t a l clear, b u t as likely a s not w i t h little indication o f the deeper problems involved in the subject.

M o r e o v e r , perhaps be-

cause o f the habit o f w r i t i n g f o r the r e v i e w s at so m u c h a sheet, he w a s too discursive, t o o disinclined t o omit.

He

c o n f u s e d g r e a t h i s t o r y w i t h l a r g e histories and, t h o u g h he could d o a neat little l i f e o f N e l s o n , w h e n e v e r he t h o u g h t he w a s w r i t i n g one o f his m o n u m e n t s f o r posterity he w o r k e d in quartos. S o u t h e y w a s a m a n o f wide r e a d i n g rather than a scholar. H e h a d neither the time nor the temperament f o r the close study w h i c h G i b b o n bestowed on his subject, nor is it s u r p r i s i n g t h a t he did not w e l c o m e the critical methods o f G e r m a n y w h e n they b e g a n to influence E n g l a n d at the end o f his life. 8 4 H i s w o r k s u f f e r e d also f r o m a love o f seclusion and c o u n t r y life

w h i c h conflicted w i t h his a m b i t i o n t o write a

treatise on P o r t u g a l .

great

In spite o f the excellence o f the col-

8 * H e wrote to W a r t e r , 25 May 1831: " I have been reading the translation of Miiller's ' D o r i a n s a n d find in it the same faults as in Niebuhr's ' Roman History.' The writers of that school consider history as fable, or fable as history, just as it may suit their present purpose, and thus they make dangerous use of their great learning. T h e y have also the grievous fault of introducing into their text what ought to be thrown into notes, or appended in dissertations,—writing history with as little method or regard to proportion as if they were writing reviews." J. W . W a r t e r , op. cit., vol. iv, pp. 219-220.

ROMANTICIST

HISTORY

243

lection at Southey's disposal, his enterprise would involve constant reference to the large libraries—the British Museum, Lord Holland's Spanish collection, the libraries at Lisbon. Now Southey worked manfully at the manuscripts while living in Portugal and he always hoped to return. He also wished to take advantage of the British Museum and of Lord Holland's invitation to make use of his collection, and on several occasions he planned to move near London, but something always intervened and he remained at Keswick, isolated in the Cumberland Hills. When he made sorties to London, the time was taken up with visits to friends ; he talks of consulting manuscripts on these occasions as if it were the play of an afternoon. The result was that although Southey thought himself the greatest authority on Portugal outside that country itself, he was really surpassed by several Germans who were applying scientific methods in their studies. 85 His histories are for the most part superseded without having served even as building material, because the bricks with which modern scholarship has been erected were themselves made by different processes from those he employed. It is evident also that Southey saw history in too sharp outline. H e must have been one of the most opinionated men of his day, a fact of prime importance in his manner of narrating past events. His antipathy for the French, Roman Catholicism, reformers and the industrial system, verged on phobia. Some of these fears came from his experience in Portugal and from the French Revolution, but their basic explanation, Professor Haller has suggested, is psychologi85 Felix Walter, La Littérature Portugaise en Angleterre a l'époque romantique (Paris, 1927), pp. 65-66. Professor William Haller points out also that Southey's oriental learning, though considerable, was not nearly as extensive as it purported to be. The Early Life of Robert Southey ( N e w Y o r k , 1 9 1 7 ) , pp. 253-264, esp. 258-259.

244

TRANSITION

IN ENGLISH

HISTORICAL

WRITING

cal.86 The sorrows of his life—sickness, loss of friends and relatives—made him desire above all else a security he could find only in the continuing institutions of his country and in a religious faith. A t the same time developing industrialism and democratic ideas menaced his life in the country, surrounded by his family. H e fought with all his power everything that threatened the security he found in established institutions and in the old ways of living. N o r could he avoid using his histories as weapons in this struggle. He was also drawn to history because he found in the past, in the study of huge folios and long dead chroniclers, much of the peace he could not get in contemplating the shifting scene of the present. In this latter respect, his love of history was typically romantic in character. If we take Southey's histories as a group we find a clear example of how such romanticist love of the past became merged with religious zeal, political partisanship, and nationalist feelings. T o the student of the art and manner of writing history he is, like his friend Turner, a very significant figure. In 1 8 0 7 was published the inaugural lecture delivered by the Reverend James Ingram as Professor of A n g l o - S a x o n at O x f o r d , an interesting reflection of the new zeal f o r AngloS a x o n history. " T h e most valuable part of the laws, the constitution, and the religion of E n g l a n d , " Ingram maintained, 87 " is undoubtedly built on a S a x o n foundation . . . my purpose will be sufficiently answered, and my labours 86 Ibid., p. 305. Lingard found Southey " timid in the extreme " on an occasion when both were giving testimony in a law case. M. Haile and E. Bonney, Life and Letters of John Lingard, 1771-1851 (London, 1 9 1 1 ) , p. 254. Does this explain Southey's tendency towards bluster in print? On Southey's opposition to industrialism see W . Haller, " Southey's Later Radicalism," Publications of the Modern Language Association of America (vol. x x x v i i , 1922, no. 2), pp. 281-292. 87

James Ingram, Inaugural Lecture Literature ( O x f o r d , 1807), pp. iv-vi.

on the Utility

of

Anglo-Saxon

ROMANTICIST

HISTORY

245

abundantly rewarded, if I contribute in the smallest degree to excite attention to these valuable monuments of our national history [contained in Saxon literature], hitherto too much neglected or misunderstood, which may not only be subjects o f curiosity to an antiquary, but may also afford interest and amusement to the statesman, the patriot, and the scholar." In this appeal based on patriotic grounds, combined with his high approval of the project for better care of the public records, Ingram pointed the direction English historical studies were henceforth to take. H e himself was one of the outstanding Anglo-Saxon students between Turner and Kemble, his chief claim to remembrance being an edition of the Saxon Chronicle issued in 1823. 88 W i t h his name we may associate that of another O x f o r d professor, John Josias Conybeare, whose contributions to Archaeologia, beginning in 1 8 1 1 , were a stimulus to Anglo-Saxon research, though mainly on the side of letters rather than history. 89 In this field belongs also Samuel Heywood's A Dissertation upon the Distinctions in Society and Ranks of the People, under the Anglo-Saxon Governments ( 1 8 1 8 ) , containing much detail on English society about the time of the Norman Conquest. Heywood knew no Anglo-Saxon, but used as his chief authorities Domesday Book, the Saxon Chronicle, and Wilkins' Anglo-Saxon Laws, as well as some manuscripts in Latin. 90 Notwithstanding this reliance on Latin sources, Gross still regarded Heywood's book as useful. 91 But it was never reprinted nor did Heywood execute his plan for a large treatise on Anglo-Saxon tenures. 88 James Ingram (ed.), The Saxon Chronicle with an English lation and notes... (London, 1823). 89 H. R. Steeves, Learned Societies (New Y o r k 1913), p. 120.

and English Literary

Scholarship

90 A Dissertation upon the Distinction in Society ... under the Saxon Governments (London, 1818), pp. lv-lvii. 91

C. Gross, op. cit. (2nd ed., 1915), p. 306.

trans-

Anglo-

246

TRANSITION

IN ENGLISH

HISTORICAL

WRITING

Thomas Dudley Fosbroke, while clergyman by profession, devoted most of his time to antiquarian pursuits. His studies, which are said to have extended to eight or nine hours a day, included the Anglo-Saxon language. 92 His British Monachism ( 1 8 0 2 ) comprised a survey of the principles and history of monasticism in England, and a description of the life of the monks, including an account of their buildings and organization. While declining " to convert the work into a Homily, by superannuated confutations of Popery," 93 Fosbroke was unfavorable to monasticism, Catholicism, and medieval civilization in general. The book, however, played some part in popularizing knowledge of the Middle Ages. Fosbroke's later writings included his Encyclopaedia of Antiquities ( 1 8 2 4 ) , A Treatise on the Arts, Manufactures, Manners and Institutions of the Greeks and Romans ( 1 8 3 0 ) , and a History of the City of Gloucester (1819). Although William Godwin did some work among the records 94 in preparing his Life of Geoffrey Chaucer ( 1 8 0 3 ) , he did not claim to be more than a novice in the field and critics have judged him severely. 95 The book was indeed marred by defects of several kinds. It was a huge, rambling sort of structure. The survey of civilization in Chaucer's day and the estimates of the Middle Ages in general were 92

See the Memoir prefixed to the third edition (London, 1843) of British Monachism. 93

Ibid., p. vii.

94

Life of Chaucer (2nd ed., London, 1804), vol. i, pp. viii, xii; vol. ii, p. 97, note and the extracts from records and other sources given in the Appendix. Also C. K. Paul, William Godwin: His Friends and Contemporaries (London, 1876), vol. ii, p. 97. On Godwin see also supra, pp. 204-207. 95 For material on the reputation of Godwin's Chaucer, see E. P. Hammond, Chaucer, a Bibliographical Manual (New York, 1908), pp. 38-39, 207.

ROMANTICIST

HISTORY

247

extended beyond reason. There are long stretches where Chaucer seems forgotten. Godwin also spent too much energy in controverting Tyrwhitt, the merits of whose edition of the Canterbury Tales ( 1 7 7 5 - 1 7 7 8 ) were not as fully recognized then as now. Sometimes, too, Godwin the philosophical reformer and censor of society supplants the biographer. Nevertheless, this book had a large measure of success and still has interesting features as a mirror of historical opinion. Godwin protested against the study of antiquities by men of " cold tempers and sterile imaginations." 98 He hoped " to carry the workings of fancy and the spirit of philosophy into the investigation of ages past." 97 Rebelling against the taste, less prevalent in his own than in an earlier day, that preferred Dryden and Pope to Chaucer and Shakespeare, he wished to restore Chaucer to popular esteem, to send his readers back " to study the language of our ancestors . . . a study at least as improving as that of the languages of Greece and Rome." 98 He liked to dwell on the early days of English history, to speak of " the good old people of England, the peasant in the midst of his family, the hospitable, wellhumoured and open-hearted country-gentleman, and the baron surrounded by his vassals. . . ." 99 He saw the age of Chaucer through the spectacles of Romanticism, 100 and could even speak of " the peculiar beauty of the Romish religion." 1 0 1 Such expressions from a man like Godwin are very significant. 102 90

Life of Chaucer, vol. i, p. ix.

87

Ibid., vol. i, p. xi.

88

Ibid., vol. i, pp. v-vi.

89

Ibid., vol. ii, pp. 254-255.

100

Ibid., vol. iv, p. 167.

101

Ibid, vol. i, p. 69.

102

Cf. vol. ii, p. 1 2 1 ; vol. iii, p. 208.

Of course there are many remarks depreciatory of the Middle Ages as well. Ibid., vol. i, pp. 28, 50, 272, 284.

248

TRANSITION

IN ENGLISH

HISTORICAL

WRITING

Scottish medieval studies were aided by George Chalmers' Caledonia: or an account historical and topographic, of North Britain; from the most ancient to the present times . . . which appeared in unfinished form in three volumes between 1807 and 1824. How Chalmers' interests were distributed may be judged from the fact that in the first volume he alloted more than 800 pages to Scottish history from 80 A. D. to 1306 A. D. and concluded with only 70 pages on subsequent times. The second and third volumes were given up to topographical history, each shire being considered in eight sections: its name; situation and extent; natural objects ; antiquities; establishment as a shire; civil history; agriculture, manufactures and trade; and ecclesiastical history. The work belongs to the field of antiquities rather than history, but it emphasized the desirability of departing from old tastes in historical study and especially urged the importance and fascination of the Middle Ages, a period " so crowded with changes and so varied with novelties." 10S It is symptomatic that Chalmers was not only conscious of the services to civilization of the monks but seems not to have felt called upon to express contempt for the institution of monasticism.104 He was resentful of Robertson's sneer at the " industry and credulity of antiquaries," and sharply criticized him for pronouncing the period of Scottish origins a realm of pure fable and for having declared that nothing before the end of the thirteenth century merited particular inquiry. Although Chalmers amassed much information of service to later students, he was cocksure 105 and uncritical, and accordingly fell into many mistakes. He accepted both Ossian and the De Situ Britanniae as genuine, besides being exces108 104 105

G. Chalmers, Caledonia... (London, 1807-24), vol. i, p. ix. Ibid., vol. i, pp. 310, 318 et scq., 782-3, 785, 804.

Ibid., vol. i, pp. v, ix and his letter in T. Constable, op. cit., vol. i, p. 418.

ROMANTICIST

HISTORY

249

sively Celticist in outlook. Thus " where John Pinkerton could find nothing but Gothic and the Goths, George Chalmers was equally unable to see anything but Welsh and the C y m r y . " 1 0 4 His attitude towards Robertson passed the bounds of a decent difference of opinion and became a personal antipathy. Chalmers was one of the hard-hitting tribe of antiquaries to which Pinkerton and Ritson belonged. But like them, too, he was a man of erudition and ability. Among Chalmers' lesser works the earlier Political Annals

of the present United Colonies from their Settlement to the Peace of 1763 ( 1 7 8 0 ) takes first place. Though excessively British and Tory in outlook it was based on state documents not generally available. 107 It stimulated Americans both to retell the story from their own point of view and, for this purpose, to collect and use the materials available in their own

country.108 The Life of Mary, Queen of Scots, drawn from the State Papers, with six subsidiary memoirs (1818) was

of value chiefly for the subordinate figures treated therein. A t the opening of the last century the fame of John K n o x stood at a low level. In the words of the Edinburgh Re109 view he was generally regarded as a " fierce and gloomy b i g o t " a view not unnatural after the Laodicean praise of Robertson 1 1 0 and the acrimonious characterization of Hume. 1 1 1 That this did not continue to be the estimate of the reading public was largely the work of the Reverend Thomas McCrie, an historian who may be placed beside Turner, Southey and Roscoe in the little group holding the 106 w . F. Skene, op. cit., p. 19. 107 G. Davies, op. cit., p. 362. J. S. Bassett, The Middle Group of American Historians (New York, 1917), pp. 44-45. 108

Bassett, loc. cit.

109

Edinburgh Review (vol. xx, July, 1812), pp. 3-4.

n o Works (London, 1840), vol. :i, pp. 36-37. 111

History of England, vol. v, p. 26.

250

TRANSITION

IN ENGLISH

HISTORICAL

WRITING

stage before Hallam. 1 1 2 The Life of John Knox, containing Illustrations of the History of the Reformation in Scotland was issued first in 1 8 1 x and then, revised and enlarged, in 1 8 1 3 . Its success was rapid and it may still be regarded as a standard biography. 1 1 ' This high place was not won without merit. McCrie was the first to make a thorough study of the letters of K n o x which he quoted frequently in text and appendix, 114 and to explore other essential sources like church registers. He did not lose sight of the movement in portraying the man with the result that his book was really a history of the Reformation in Scotland until the death of K n o x in 1572, rather than merely the biography of one of its leaders, albeit the most important. Nor was he without discrimination in estimate of the national hero. He admitted K n o x ' s lack of amiability and, while asserting his claim to a place among the great Reformers, placed him definitely below Luther, Calvin and Zwingli. 1 1 5 While this sense of discrimination is one of McCrie's best qualities, he was at the same time intensely prejudiced in certain of his views. He gibed at the Catholics and arraigned the English religious settlement.116 His contempt for the antiquarians with their love of Gothic remains scarcely 112

On the growth of respect for Knox's memory, especially in Scotland, see Thomas McCrie, Life of Thomas McCrie, D. D. author of John Knox ... (Philadelphia, 1842), pp. 171-172. 113 Sixth English edition, 1842; German translation, 1 8 1 7 ; Spanish, 1835. " A s the expression of a special view of K n o x that biography, alike by its learning and ability, must remain one of the standard books in the language." P. Hume Brown, John Knox, A Biography (London, 1895), vol. i, p. x. The recent Guide to Historical Literature (ed. G. M. Dutcher and others, New Y o r k , 1 9 3 1 ) , p. 555, lists McCrie's Knox among biographies " of greater value for the general reader." 114

Life

115

Ibid., vol. ii, pp. 260-261.

116

Ibid., vol. i, pp. 44, 45, 69.

of Knox

(4th edition, 1818), vol. ii, pp. 367-469.

ROMANTICIST

HISTORY

knew any bounds. His defence of the destruction of Roman Catholic art by the super-heated zeal of the Reformers must certainly be called benighted.117 He was, as Hallam remarked with customary aptness of characterization, a presbyterian Hildebrand.118 Everything he wrote was marred by this intense prejudice, made more.obnoxious by a liberal use of his considerable gifts of sarcasm. 119 This was a very different sort of clergyman-historian from the temperate Robertson; and the difference reflects the growth of piety and national feeling that intervened between the two men. One of its results was to make Robertson unpopular in the circles where McCrie was rated most highly.120 McCrie never realized his desire to write a history of the Reformation after Knox; but The Life of Andrew Melville ( 1 8 1 9 ) treated a significant phase of that subject inasmuch as Melville (1545-1622) was one of Knox's chief successors. This work also is still in use. 121 McCrie prepared several shorter biographical studies, later collected in his Miscellaneous Writings ( 1 8 4 1 ) , and completed but did not print part of a life of Calvin. 122 He broke new ground with two small books in which he treated of the Evangelical movement in Jtaly and Spain at the time of the Reformation. 133 In addi117

Ibid., vol. i, pp. 271-278, 436-442, and note H H .

118

Constitutional

1,9

History

F o r the offence thus McCrie, pp. 166-167.

of England,

vol. ii, p. 478 note.

given see T .

McCrie,

Life

of

Thomas

120 F o r an excellent example of how the zealous came to regard Robertson in the last century, see ibid., pp. 162-163. 121

Godfrey Davies, op. cit., p. 315, calls it " o f first importance f o r the period." 122

F o u r chapters were published in 1880 as The Early Years of John Calvin. A Fragment, 1509-1536 (ed. William Ferguson, Edinburgh, 1880). 123

History of the Progress and Suppression of the Reformation in Italy in the Sixteenth Century (Edinburgh, 1827). History of the Prog-

252

TRANSITION

IN ENGLISH

HISTORICAL

WRITING

tion to all this he wrote much for periodicals, one of his contributions being a review impugning the accuracy of Scott's portrait of the Covenanters given in Tales of my Landlord.12* ress and Suppression of the Reformation (Edinburgh, 1829).

in Spain in the Sixteenth

Century

1 2 4 T h i s first appeared in the Christian Instructor f o r 1817, was reprinted in 1824, and may now be found, with an introduction by M c C r i e ' s son, in Miscellaneous Writings (Edinburgh, 1841), pp. 247-450. G o d f r e y Davies, op. cit., p. 304, calls it an " able review," but I have not read it.

C H A P T E R

IX

F R O M R O S C O E TO L I N G A R D

THE growth of a nationalist outlook, the spread of Whig views, and the appearance of Romanticist histories such as those by Turner and Southey constitute the three most important trends of the early nineteenth century. But not all the writers with whom the new century opened are to be classified under these headings. Some indeed represented little departure from rationalist ideas even when their adventures into new fields helped change historical perspective indirectly and in the long run. In this chapter we shall mention briefly a selection of such writers leading to a discussion of James Mill's History of British India, Hallam's survey of the Middle Ages, and Lingard's volumes on England. These three works, together with Hallam's Constitutional History which we have considered in Chapter V I I , inaugurated the line of distinguished nineteenth-century histories. With them accordingly this part of our essay may properly end. William Roscoe 1 began writing as early as 1795, but his fame was contemporary with that of Turner and Southey. Roscoe sought to connect the " golden histories " of Gibbon and Robertson (Charles V) by means of biographies of Lorenzo de Medici and Leo the Tenth. In fact his Life of Lorenzo de' Medici ( 1 7 9 5 ) and his Life and Pontificate of Leo the Tenth ( 1 8 0 5 ) constitute a history of the Italian Renaissance during the late fifteenth and early sixteenth centuries. They gave Roscoe a prominent place in the revival 1 Henry Roscoe's The Life found valuable.

of William Roscoe

(London, 1833), will be

253

TRANSITION

IN ENGLISH

HISTORICAL

WRITING

of enthusiasm for Italian studies characteristic of the Romanticist period during which he lived; but the ideas which Roscoe brought to his work are so directly derived f r o m the period of the Enlightenment that he has not unhappily been called a disciple of Voltaire. 2 He believed that history is largely a gloomy record of crimes and follies, relieved at intervals by eras of culture and civilization. F r o m a contemplation of these interludes mankind may learn how to avoid decadence in the f u t u r e and it is the historian's duty to survey such oases while explaining their appearance and disappearance. It was natural for Roscoe to organize his treatment of the Italian Renaissance around Lorenzo and Leo because he believed that it was such great individuals who are mainly responsible for the heights to which mankind has intermittently risen. 3 T h i s is of course strikingly similar to Voltaire, but the resemblance between the two men might be traced further. Both adopted a pragmatic view of history; both stressed the importance of letters and arts rather than of political history; both talked of " moral " causes as determining the course of events; both were, as we have seen in the case of Roscoe, apt to organize their works around great men in a given era; in both there was a strong tinge of pessimism; and both viewed the Middle Ages with jaundiced eye. T h e Life of Lorenzo de' Medici on which Roscoe had worked for many years won an immediate and ultimately almost a world-wide success- Lord Lansdowne, whose memory ran back to H u m e ' s first volumes, said he could not recall any book having met with an equal reception. 1 Long 2

E . Fueter, op. cit., p. 622.

3

Much of Roscoe's philosophy of history will be found outlined in his On the Origin and Vicissitudes of Literature, Science and Art, and their influence on the present state of society. A Discourse . . . (Liverpool, 1 8 1 7 ) , as well as in his histories. 4

H . Roscoe, op. cit., vol. i, p. 167.

ROSCOE

TO

LINGARD

255

before the tenth E n g l i s h edition was reached, in 1 8 5 1 , there were translations into French, German, and Italian. T h e subject was new in almost every language and as a pioneer Roscoe deserved all the praise he was given f o r his zeal in procuring copies of manuscripts f r o m Italy and in making the work at once readable and an addition to learning. On the other hand, he did not visit Italy himself and his representative, M r . William Clarke, was not trained in the selection and use of historical materials. Nor, f o r that matter, was Roscoe, so that subsequent investigation, of which he was himself in large part the cause, soon surpassed his own efforts. Particularly was this the case because Roscoe allowed himself to indulge in an uncritical enthusiasm f o r Lorenzo both as ruler and man. He said that he was surpassed by no character of ancient or modern history f o r " depth of penetration, versatility of talent, or comprehension of mind," 5 and declared that if Lorenzo had devoted himself to literature alone he could have been one of the greatest if not the greatest of Italian poets. Sismondi criticised Roscoe severely, not f o r his praise of Lorenzo's literary abilities, but for failing to distinguish in his admiration between Lorenzo the poet and Lorenzo the statesman, as Sismondi himself did. Indeed Sismondi went so f a r as to accuse Roscoe of having misinterpreted the facts through a desire to g l o r i f y the Italian tyrant. 6 Roscoe thought his Leo the Tenth a better book than its predecessor, but its success though great was less resounding. F o r one thing, in spite of the subject and its author's historical predilections, wars and internal commotions loom larger than artistic and intellectual history. Moreover, on 5 0

Life of Lorenzo de'Medici

(Liverpool, 1795), vol. ii, p. 240.

Roscoe's Illustrations... of the Life of Lorenzo de'Medici (London, 1822) is largely an argument against his critics on forty specific points with supporting documents. For Sismondi's points see pp. 24-36.

256

TRANSITION

IN ENGLISH

HISTORICAL

WRITING

the whole, Roscoe showed himself less appreciative of Pope Leo than of the secular statesman Lorenzo. But chiefly the rationalistic interpretation given to the Reformation and the religious leaders infuriated Protestant reviewers in an age of Evangelical revival. 7 Roscoe undertook to point out some failings in Luther and to criticize some supposed benefits of the Reformation, an undertaking more likely to be welcomed in an earlier or at a later day. Much of what he said was true in itself, but the sympathy necessary for full and accurate historical portraiture was undoubtedly lacking. Roscoe recognized that Luther was able, sincere and honorable, and perhaps gave him too much credit for learning. But he saw also failings of passion and prejudice, and that fundamental inconsistency between Luther's early advocacy of complete liberty of private judgment in religious affairs and his later denial of that right in practice. The Reformation as a whole, it was pointed out, had not been marked by unmixed progress in the field of literature, in morals and manners, in politics, fine arts, or toleration. The author was particularly assailed for asserting that the Protestants had not eschewed persecution and for pointing to the not unfamiliar fact that Servetus was burned in a Protestant city with Calvin's approval. Now many similar comments were being made at this time by historians like Sharon Turner and Robert Southey. But these criticised the shortcomings of the Reformers while remaining pious, even ardent, Protestants. They emphasized the profound spiritual revolution of which the Reformation, for good or ill, was the greatest expression; while Roscoe looked upon it from an external, an outmoded, stand7 The Christian Observer said that Roscoe was " uniformly hostile to Christianity," that he "had received a retaining fee from the P o p e " and concluded with the charitable observation that " he gave rise to a strong temptation to burn him." For these and other references see H. Roscoe,