The Express.
London, England, 1858-04-07 00:00:00

LITERATURE.

History of England, from the Fall of Wok" to
the Death of Elizabeth. By Jamas Aslant
F2017D1, late Fellow of Exeter College, Oxford.
Vol. 111. and IV. London : John W. Parker.
Mr. Fronde has begun and ably continued a
Laborious work, which promises to do the State some
service. In the sixteenth century England was
going through a tremendous crisis. When the
monarchial of Western Europe wore slowly evolving
themselves he would have been a bold man who
shou'..l have prophesied that England would become
A land of settled government,
A land of just and old renown.
Where freedom broadens slowly down
From precedent to precedent.
Yet it was a brilliant period nevertheless. States-
manship, and eloquence, and diplomacy, became
vital powers. The sword was still in request, but
it was becoming less and leas the ultimate appeaL
In some degree it made way for the pen, and found
itself matched by intellect and reason. The dim 'Fey
.1 morning was glimmering in the east ; men's minds
were awakening to the reception of eternal truths.
Ideas were being printed and published by the press.
Art was preparing to fulfil her narks to civilise and
rase. England began to be what till the present
time she has ever been, the land of illustrious states-
men. A more interesting period in our annals it is
impossible to contemplate ; yet the first impression
left by Mr. Fronde is unpleasant. The reason is not
far to seek.

If one thing be clearer than another, it is the fact
that the Englishman is essentially practical and con-
servative. In England at any rate Aristophanes
would not have placed his Clondland. The Eng-
lishman's theology is positive, and all his opinions
are of a similar character. Every educated man
knows with what a pang he abandons his childish
belief in Homer, and Romulus and Remus, and in
the ever sweet fables of his golden youth. It is hard
to throw away fictions which have touched the
hearts of ages—which have clothed the beautiful
and the good in familiar shape, which genius has
enshrined and made immortal. In the same way, it
is bard to find how little we can rely on toe popular
portraits of our national historic gallery, and to feel
that the sneer of the great Walpole is well founded :
"Don't read me history, for that I know to be false."
Now if there be one man more than another of whom
we have a clear definite opinion, it is Henry VIII.
All history here is unanimous. There he stands, and
has stood for ages, in his niche—a distinct royal Blue-
beard—licentious, cruel, and despotic,—one whose
" royal nature," as Wolsey writer, was such that
rather than want any part of his pleasure, it would
lead him to endanger half of his kingdom—one who
would sacrifice to his caprice man in his virtue.
woman in her beauty—aye, even the grey hairs of
me. Mr. Froude now asks us to blot all this out.
H. has ignored what his predecessors hare
written. He has refused to take the common
idea upon trust. He has ransacked the
State Paper-office. He has written history upon an
original plan, and has arrived at original conclusions.
We are bound to say that his history is, in many
respects, the clearest and most rational account of the
reign of Henry VIII. we have ever read—that he
throws alight upon the foreign relations of the Eng-
lish Court, the absence of which has led to much con-
fusion—that the narrative is copious, yet attractive
—that the author writes with the ease of a thorough
master of the subject—and that no one who wishes
to understand the period referred to will be wise in
omitting to consult Mr. Fronde. The fault of the
writer is that he relies exclusively on State Papers
and diplomatic correspondence, and places too little
reliance on other and more obvious sources of his-
tory. Are the reports of state trials—are the testi-
monies of perjured witnesses to be relied on ? Cer-
tainly not. Is it not equally clear that the state
documents will put the best interpretation on the
acts of the king and his mini-tens, and will aim
rather at plausibility than truth? What motive
was there for blackening the character of Henry ?
We may suppose the Roman Catholic his-
torians retailed and exaggerated the slander and
lying rumours of the times, but the general idea
I of the British Protestant public—of ninety.nine men
oat of a hundred—hie been little, if at all, affected
by Roman Catholic writers. It is true Mr. Fronde
discovers inaccuracies in the chroniclers upon whom
we have generally relied. He tells us neither Stowe,
nor Hollinshed, nor even Hale, nor any one of them,
can be treated in their account of the rising in Lan-
cashire in 1636. Foxe also comes in for censure,
sometimes, we think, unfairly. In mentioning Anne
Ascue, Mr. Fronde argues that Foxe's version of the,
story is contradicted by his own documents. Yet,
ia Mr. Froude's zeal to argue against the creel cha-
racter of Henry, Foxe is admitted as a witness.
But are state documents such indisputable testi-
mony? Suppose some hundred years hence a
Frenchman were to write a history of the reign of
Louis Napoleon on Mr. Froude's plan, can we not
see what innumerable blunders he would make P
For instance, of course he would consult the semi-
official pamphlet of Ouerroniire, and we should
have • few beery specters in a London tavern ele-
vated into the dignity of a grand regicide propa-
ganda. We are not sure Mr. Froude has not been
betrayed into mistakes almost as great. As an in-
stance, we quote his