The Press. — London, England, 1857-07-11 00:00:00

yittraturt. Kittery of OiviAmami in England. By Henry Thomas Buckle. Vol. I. London : J. W. Parker and Son. Tx one point of view the bulky volume before us must be pronounced the book of the season—its size is enormous. It has 854 pages, with an average of forty lines in a page, and it has a labyrinth of notes, studded with references so close and frequent as to make the eyes dizzy. It con tains about the quantity of matter which is usually put in five octavo volumes ; the read ing displayed in it is immense ; and when we have added that it is the first production of a young man, ani that it is only the first part of a general introduction to a work which is yet to come, we shall have said enough to excite our readers attention to this pyramid of prolego mena. "De omnibus rebus et quibusdam aliis " should be the motto of this book, whisk is quite unique in its variety of con tents. Mr. Buckle, its author, is a disciple of Comte, and is a missionary of the positive school. His creed is that of a philosophical Radical, and ho has all the dogmatism and virulent prejudice which marks the school of the elder Mi ll. His mind is bookridden, and he has an extravagant faith in all the ()login, and a sovereign contempt for most historians, because they did not anticipate the method of Comte. He is ignorant of the fact that history must be composed by literary rules, and not with a direct reference to philosophy, because time and space prevent an historian from describing natural and material wonders. Mr. Buckle professes to write the history of civilisation in England, and ho has lost him self in a General Introduction, in which the history of the sciences is racked for illustra tion. Long dissertations on political economy, reflections on religious animosities, popula tion, aspects of nature, inquiries of all sorts on subjects of every kind, fill up this immense book. He has given us an imperfect encyclo pedia. Ought not this fact to teach Mr. Buckle that after all he knows little of the method 1111 which history should be written? Mr. Buckle cannot be received as yet as an original thinker. He has much talent, chiefly of an acquisitive kind, but we do not discern any symptoms of genius in his composition. He wants insight and intuitive qualities. He is deficient in the faculty of veneration, and , he has no appreciation of poetry. He is, we repeat, bookridden, and he recalls to us what , Robert Hall said of Dr. Kippis, " that he had " put so many books on the top of his brain 1 /' that he could not use his faculties with free " dom." A stupendous pedant differs widely from a profound thinker. Still we must recollect that Mr. Buckle is a young man, and it is to be hoped that he will Improve with time. His industry and his pear,ents (even though he makes aof f them) we cannot but admire. We however, that there is too much of index- EMr in this big book, and that the learned lire manufactured on Toni Moore's sys . We shall present before the eyes of our readers some specimens of the mode in which this book is composed. Thus the text runs as to the increase of scepticism : These are only some of the innumerable signs, which mast be discerned by every man who is not blinded by the prvdedioes of an imperfect education. An immense in/Jerky of the clergy,—some from ambitious feelings, but the greater part, I believe, from conscientious motives, —lre striving to check the progress of that scepticism which is now gathering in upon us from every quarter. And we have this note appended:— As some writers, moved by their wishes rather than by *dr knowledge, seek to deny this, it may be well to °b een* that the increase of scepticism since the latter part jet the eighteenth century is attested by an immense mass at evidence, as will appear to whoever will compare the , . o ing authorities : Whately's Dangers to Christian Faith, ; Kay's Social Condition of the People, vol. ii. p. SW ; ilk, de la Democratic, vol. iii. p. 72 ; J. H. Newman - evelopwient, pp. 28, 29 ; F. 11 7 . Newman's Natural wr the Soul, p. 197; Parr's Works, vol. ii. p. 5, vol, 688 . 6 80 ; Felkin's Moral Statistics, in Journal of Boc. vol. 1. p, 541 ; Watson's Observations nn the Wesley, pp. 155, 194 ; Matter, Hist. du Onosticisme, P. 486; Ward's Ideal of a Christian (Mulch, pp. 266, 4041 7'mrsee4 *a, of lallantl i VW, ii. pp. 129, l'ill an %FT.', n ink ; tatorr ev in ju p t: th .„ 60/, 40 THE PRESS, JULY 11,1857. vol. iii. R. 509 ; Priestly's Memoirs, vol. i. pp. 127, 128, 440, vol. ii. p. 751 ; Cappe's Memoirs, p. 367; Nichors Lit. Anec. of Eighteenth Century, vol. iv. p. 671, vol. viii. p. 473 ; Nichors Must. of Lit. Hist. vol. v. p. 640 ; Combc's Notes on the United Stales, vol. ii. pp. 171, 172, 183. But an index-maker might add 9 couple of pages more of references in the same style, and, what is more to the point, another index maker could fill pages of references to show the increase of religion. The tone of society at London and Paris is the best answer to the increase of scepticism alleged by this author. But we cite the foregoing note as a sample of his manner, and in index-learning he is a pro ficient. Alluding to the invention of gunpowder, we have this note : The consequences of the invention of gunpowder are considered very superficially by Frederick Schlegel (Lectures on the History of Literature, vol. ii. pp. 37, 38), and by Dugald Stewart (Philosophy of the Mind, vol. i. p. 282). They are examined with much greater ability, though by no means exhaustively, in Smith's Wealth of Nations, book v. chap. i. pp. 292, 298, 297; Herder's Ideen tar Geschichte der Menschheit, vol. iv. p. 301 ; Hallam 's Middle Ages, vol. ii. p. 470. But surely Frederick Schlegel and Dugald Stewart could not enter at length in such works upon the invention of gunpowder. Mr. Buckle does not know that digressions damage the directness of purpose which ought to be looked for in every great work. Of his style of thinking with reference to famous individuals, we shall take him upon George 111., Edmund Burke, and Voltaire : This reactionary movement was greatly aided by the personal character of George 111. • for be, being despotic as well as superstitous, was equally anxious to extend the prerogative, and strengthen the Church. Every liberal sentiment, every thing approaching to reform, nay, even the mere mention of irquity, was an abomination in the eyes of that narrow and ignorant prince. Without know. ledge, without taste, without even a glimpse of one of the sciences, or afeeling for one of the fine arts, education had done nothing to enlarge a mind which nature had more than usually contracted. Totally ignorant of the history and resources of foreign countries, and barely knowing their geographical position, his information was scarcely more extensive respecting the people over whom he was called to rule. In that immense mass of evidence now extant, and which consists of every description of private corre spondence, records of private conversationl and of public acts, there is not to be found the slightest proof that he knew any one of those numerous things which the governor of a country ought to know ' • or, indeed, that he was acquainted with a single duty of his position, except that mere mechanical routine of ordinary business, which might have been effected by the lowest clerk in the meanest office in his kingdom. - - This sort of cant we thought was obsolete. George 111. would not be the slave of the Whig faction, and its writers have never ceased abusing him. King George did not set up for the character of a scholar upon the smattering of mechanics' institutes, and we may admit that he was not skilled in literary accomplish ments; but he knew how to rule himself and, others. ' He was a brave man, an honest man, and a pious man ; and it is truly disgusting, at this time of day, to find a writer branding his piety as " superstition." The effect pro duced by his conscientious character, and by his strict morality, was of prodigious benefit in the relaxed and degenerate morality of the eighteenth century. He reverenced his God, he was faithful to his kingly obligations, and he felt for his people like a true English king ; and that people enthusiastically repaid him with an homage never given to any sovereign since Elizabeth. They revered his simple virtues, his manly disregard of the vices and frippery and empty tinsel of Court life ; and when the revolutionary storm came, King George sat on an unshaken throne. We suppose that Mr. Buckle, and pedants of his kind, would prefer a James 1., or a King of Bavaria, to a sovereign like George 111. But the people of England do not want their kings to be pedagogues or public writers. King George, after some years of obloquy, became a great national favourite, and the " reason why " is not difficult to discover. He was an excellent specimen of an Englishman, and a good type of the people whom he ruled. He had the merits and prejudices of the English character. If he was bola to his foes, he was faithful to his friends. He was a pious Chris tian and an honest Protestant. Popularity followed him, though he never ran after it. In an ago of infidelity, he was a believer ; in an ago of voluptuousness, he was undebauehed ; in the midst of calumny, slander, and faction, 104 14emI wse 444ttuated. no livo4 to trittluph over his foes, and he did so amidst the acclaim of an empire. From his own pocket he pro vided for the wants of the children of his arch enemy, Lord Chatham ; and was it not like just retribution that, after being vilified by the first Pitt, King George should have been served by the son of his personal enemy, developed into a thorough Tory, and for seven teen years the dutiful servant of the Crown ? As there is ignorant depreciation of George 111., so there is ignorant admiration of Burke shown by this author. Burke can be quoted on both sides of the question, and there are many passages in his life of an equivocal cha racter. His genius and acquisitions of know ledge, and his powers as a great writer, are beyond dispute. But Mr. Buckle does not know all that is to be said against Burke. Was he safe, and to be relied on ? Were his views on India adopted by the country? Where is the practical measure ever drawn up by his hand ? Had he temper to lead a party ? Did he not use vituperation to excess, and refuse to be responsible? Were there not many personal faults (to be touched with the reverence due to the infirmities of genius) in Edmund Burke that greatly detracted from his vast powers? It is strange. also, that Mr. Buckle, who admires " scepticism " so much, and rails so often at " superstition," should go into ecstasies about Burke, who would deride the " philosophy " of such a writer as that before us. Voltaire is an object of Mr. Buckle's enthu siastic admiration. He writes : There is, indeed, something extraordinary in the change which, in France, one generation was able to effect in the method of writing history. The beet way, perhaps, to form an idea of this, will be to compare the works of Voltaire with those of Bossnet; because these great authors were probably the most able, and were certainly the most influential, Frenchmen during the period they respectively represented. The first great improvement which we find is Voltaire, as compared with Bonnet, is an increased perception of the dignity of the human intel lect. In addition to the circumstances already noticed, we must remember that the reading of Bossnet lay in a direction which prevented him from feeling this. He had not studied those branches of knowledge where great things have been achieved ; but he was very conversant with the writings of the saints and fathers, whose speculations are by no means calculated to give us a high opinion of the resources of their own understanding. Thus accus tomed to contemplate the workings of the mind in what is, on the whole, the most puerile literature Europe has ever produced, the contempt which Bonnet felt for man kind went on increasing; until it reached that inordinate degree which, in his later works, is painfully conspicuous. But Voltaire, who paid no attention to such things as these, passed his long life in the constant accumulation of real and available knowledge. His mind was essentially modern. Despising unsupported authority, and heedless of tradition, he devoted himself to subjects in which the triumph of the human reason is too apparent to be mis taken. The more his knowledge advanced, the more he admired those vast powers by which the knowledge had been created. Hence his admiration for the intellect of man, so far from diminishing, grew with his growth ; anti just in the same proportion, there was strengthened his love of humanity, and his dislike to the prejudices which had long obscured its history. That this, in the march of his mind, was the course it actually followed, will be evi dent to any one who considers the different spirit of his works, in reference to the different periods of life in which they were produced. A passage like this (and there are many such in the volume) could never stand criticism. " The dignity of the human intellect" is an unfortunate phrase as applied to Voltaire, who was totally deficient in the faculty of venera tion. Mr. Buckle has no knowledge of the fathers of the Church, else he would not pro nounce their writings " the most puerile " literature Europe has ever (!) produced ;" and elsewhere Mr. Buckle says of Voltaire : I have been the more particular in stating the immense obligations history is under to Voltaire, because in England there exists against him a prejudice, which nothing but ignorance, or something worse than igen. ranee, can excuse ; and because, taking him on the whole, he is probably the greatest historian Europe has yet pro. duced. An author commits himself by such extrava gance. Voltaire introduced the pamphleteer, ing mode of writing history. The grave, measured, and dignified style was entirely beyond his appreciation. He wished that history should be light, sparkling, and popularly readable. But there are long series of events which cannot be treated in a sharp, smart, lively style. There are many passages scattered through this enormous volume which run counter to the feelings and prejudices of the majority I of our gnglitich pqblia t an 4 which 4rl