Изображения страниц
PDF
EPUB
[ocr errors]

Alexander, who loved wine, and was naturally choleric, had been bred under the feverity of Roman difcipline, it is probable he would neither have made a bonfire of Perfepolis for his whore, nor have killed his friend. If Scipio, who was naturally given to women, for which anecdote we have, if I mistake not, the authority of Polybius, as well as fome verses of Nævius preferved by A. Gellius, had been educated by Olympias at the court of Philip, it is improbable that he would have reftored the beautiful Spaniard. In fhort, if the renowned Socrates had not corrected nature by art, this firft apoftle of the Gentiles had been a very profligate fellow by his own confeffion; for he was inclined to all the vices Zopyrus imputed to him, as they fay, on the obfervation of his phyfiognomy.

With him therefore who denies the effect of education, it would be in vain to dispute; and with him who admits them, there can be no difpute concerning that share which I afcribe to the study of history, in forming our moral characters, and making us better men. The very perfons who pretend that inclinations cannot be reftrained, nor habits corrected, against our natural bent, would be the fift perhaps to prove in certain cafes the contrary. A fortune at court, or the favours of a lady, have prevailed on many to conceal, and they could not conceal without reftraining, which is one step towards correcting, the vices they were by nature addicted to the most. Shall we imagine now that the beauty of virtue and the deformity of vice, the charms of a bright and lafting reputation, the terror of being delivered over as criminals to all pofterity, the real benefit arifing from a confcientious discharge of the duty we owe to others, which benefit fortune can neither hinder nor take away, and the reasonableness of conforming ourselves to the defigns of God manifested in the constitution of human nature; fhall we imagine, I fay, that all these are not able to acquire the fame power over those who are continually called upon to a contemplation of them, and they who apply themselves to the ftudy of history are fo called upon, as other motives mean and fordid, in comparison of these, can ufurp on other men?

That the ftudy of hiftory, far from making us wifer, and more useful citizens, as well as better men, may be of no advantage whatsoever; that it may serve to render us mere antiquaries and fcholars, or that it may help to make us forward coxcombs, and prating pedants, I have already allowed, but this is not the fault of history: and to convince

us

us that it is not, we need only contrast the true use of hiftory with the ufe that is made of it by such men as these. We ought always to keep in mind, that hiftory is philofophy teaching by examples how to conduct ourselves in all the fituations of private and public life; that therefore we muft apply ourselves to it in a philofophical spirit and manner; that we must rise from particular to general knowledge; and that we must fit ourselves for the fociety and bufinefs of mankind, by accuftoming our minds to reflect and meditate on the characters we find defcribed, and the courfe of events we find related there. Particular examples may be of ufe fometimes in particular cafes: but the application of them is dangerous. It must be done with the utmost circumfpection, or it will be feldom done with fuccefs. And yet one would think that this was the principal use of the ftudy of hiftory, by what has been written on the fubject. I know not whether Machiavel himself is quite free from . defect on this account; he feems to carry the use and plication of particular examples too far.'

ap

Our author produces several instances from ancient, and modern history, to fhew how dangerous it is to govern ourfelves by particular examples; and obferves, that if a general should now act the same part that Codrus and the Decii did formerly, and, in order to fecure his victory get killed as fast as he could, though he might pass for an hero, yet he would certainly pafs for a madman.

There are certain general principles, fays he, and rules of life and conduct, which always must be true, because they are conformable to the invariable nature of things. He who ftudies hiftory, as he would study philofophy, will foon distinguish and collect them, and by doing fo will foon form to himself a general system of ethics and politics on the fureft foundations, on the trial of these principles and rules in all ages, and on the confirmation of them by univerfal experience. I faid he will diftinguish them; for once more I must fay, that as to particular modes of actions, and meafures of conduct, which the customs of different countries, the manners of different ages, and the circumstances of different conjunctures, have appropriated, as it were, it is always ridiculous, or imprudent and dangerous, to employ them. But this is not all. By contemplating the vast variety of particular characters and events; by examining the ftrange combinations of caufes, different, remote, and feemingly oppofite, that often concur in producing one effect; and the surprising fertility of one fingle and uniform cause in

I

the

the producing of a multitude of effects as different, as remote, and feemingly as oppofite; by tracing carefully, as carefully as if the fubject he confiders were of perfonal and immediate concern to him, all the minute and sometimes scarce perceivable circumstances, either in the characters of actors, or in the course of actions, that history enables him to trace, and according to which the fuccefs of affairs, even the greatest, is moftly determined; by thefe, and fuch methods as thefe, for I might defcend into a much greater detail, a man of parts may improve the study of history to its proper and principal ufe; he may fharpen the penetration, fix the attention of his mind, and ftrengthen his judgment; he may acquire the faculty and the habit of difcerning quicker and looking farther; and of exerting that flexibility, and steadiness, which are neceffary to be joined in the conduct of all affairs that depend on the concurrence or oppofition of other men.

Mr. Locke, I think, recommends the study of geometry even to those who have no defign of being geometricians: and he gives a reason for it, that may be applied to the prefent cafe. Such perfons may forget every problem that has been propofed, and every folution that they or others have given; but the habit of pursuing long trains of ideas will remain with them, and they will pierce through the mazes of sophism, and discover a latent truth, where perfons who have not this habit will never find it.

[ocr errors]

In this manner the study of history will prepare us for action and obfervation. Hiftory is the ancient author: experience is the modern language. We form our taste on the first; we tranflate the fenfe and reason, we transfuse. the spirit and force: but we imitate only the particular graces of the original; we imitate them according to the idiom of our own tongue, that is, we fubftitute often equivalents in the lieu of them, and are far from affecting to copy them fervilely. To conclude, as experience is converfant about the prefent, and the prefent enables us to guefs at the future; fo hiftory is converfant about the past, and by knowing the things that have been, we become better able to judge of the things that are.'

The fubfequent part of this letter, which is a very long one, confifts of reflexions on the ftate of ancient hiftory, both profane and facred. His lordship is at great pains to fhew that we have neither in profane nor in facred authors, fuch authentic, clear, diftinét and full accounts of the originals of ancient nations, and of the great events of those VOL. VI.

T

ages

ages that are commonly called the firft ages, as deferve to go by the name of hiftory, or as afford fufficient materials for chronology and hiftory. In regard to ancient profane hiftory, he tells us that there is no pretence to place the beginning of the hiftorical age fo high as Varro placed it, by five hundred years; and he endeavours to fhew, that even the hiftorical part of the old teftament is infufficient to give us light into the originals of ancient nations. He makes a diftinction between the hiftorical parts of the old teftament, and the legal, doctrinal, and prophetical parts; and feems to allow the infallibility of fcripture authority with regard to the latter, though he denies it to the former.

I may deny, fays he, that the old teftament is tranfmitted to us under all the conditions of an authentic history, and yet be at liberty to maintain that the paffages in it, which eftablish original fin, which feem favourable to the doctrine of the trinity, which foretell the coming of the Meffiah, and all others of fimilar kind, are come down to us, as they were originally dictated, by the Holy Ghoft."

In attributing the whole credibility of the old teftament to the authority of the new, and, and in limiting the authenticity of the Jewish fcriptures to thofe parts alone that concern law, doctrine, and prophecy, by which their chronology and the far greatest part of their history are excluded, I will venture to affure your lordship that I do not affume so much as is affumed in every hypothefis, that affixes the divine feal of inspiration to the whole canon, that refts the whole proof on Jewifh veracity, and that pretends to account particularly and pofitively for the descent of these ancient writings in their prefent ftate.

'Another reason, for which I have infifted the rather on the distinction so often mentioned, is this. I think we may find very good foundation for it even in the bible: and tho' this be a point very little attended to, and much difguifed, it would not be hard to fhew, upon great inducements of probability, that the law and the history were far from being blended together as they now ftand in the Pentateuch, even from the time of Mofes down to that of Efdras. But the principal and decifive reason for feparating in fuch manner the legal, doctrinal, and prophetical parts, from the historical, is the neceffity of having fome rule to go by and I protest I know of none that is yet agreed upon. I content myself, therefore, to fix my opinion concerning the authority of the old teftament in this manner, and carry it thus far only. We muft do fo, or we must en

ter

ter into that labyrinth of difpute and contradiction, wherein even the most orthodox Jews and Christians have wandered fo many ages, and ftill wander. It is ftrange, but it is true; not only the Jews differ from the Chriftians, but Jews and Chriftians both differ among themselves, concerning almost every point that is neceffary to be certainly known and agreed upon, in order to establish the authority of books which both have received already as authentic and facred. So that whoever takes the pains to read what learned men have writ on this fubject, will find that they leave the matter as doubtful as they took it up. Who were the authors of these scriptures when they were published, how they were compofed and preferved, or renewed, to ufe a remarkable expreffion of the famous Huet in his demonstration; in fine, how they were loft during the captivity, and how they were retrieved after it, are all matters of controversy to this day.'

Towards the conclufion of this letter his lordship obferves, that if the hiftory of the old teftament was as exact and authentic, as the ignorance and impudence of fome rabbies have made them affert that it is, yet ftill he who expects to find a fyftem of chronology, or a thread of history, or fufficient materials for either, in the books of the old teftament, expects to find what the authors of thefe books, whoever they were, never intended.

In the fourth letter our noble author fhews the folly of endeavouring to establish universal pyrrhonism in matters of hiftory, because there are few hiftories without fome lies, and none without some mistakes; and proves that the body of history which we poffefs, fince ancient memorials have been fo critically examined, and modern memorials have been fo multiplied, contains in it such a probable series of events, easily distinguishable from the improbable, as force the affent of every man who is in his fenfes, and are fuffi cient to answer all the purposes of the ftudy of hiftory.

In the fifth letter, his lordship, after confidering the great use of history, properly fo called, as diftinguished from the writings of mere annalifts and antiquaries, and obferving the progrefs that the Romans and the Greeks made towards hiftory, proceeds to fhew what ufe is to be made of it by divines, and those who are called to the service of their country. • I have faid so much, fays he, concerning the share which divines of all religions have taken in the corruption of hiftory, that I fhould have anathemas pronounced against me, no doubt, in the eaft and the weft,

« ПредыдущаяПродолжить »