Southern Quarterly Review

WHEN a new work is issued from the press, in any degree calculated to attract general notice, an early review of its merits is desirable, to direct attention to its excellencies, if it be excellent, or to unveil its errors and defects, if it be faulty. Should years have elapsed since its original publication, aud should it have been frequently referred to, during that period, as a standard authority, a reprint seems to recognize it as a classic, and commends it to the world, in such a manner as to preclude the suspicion of great faults, and to deaden inquiry into the propriety of its views. If, therefore, a work of real excellence be re-issued from the press, its republication is suf ficiently strong presumptive evidence of its worth, to guarantee for it general acceptance, and it may be safely permitted to ფი forth again into the world, without any observation on our part. But if, on the contrary, the work re published should be intrinsically defective, it becomes our duty to put in a caveat for the benefit of others,—and the more eager they may be to receive it without scrutiny, and to welcome it without suspicion, the more auxions should we be, as reviewers, to caution them against rashly admi ting to their confidence a false guide and dangerous monitor. We conceive

Herder's Philosophy of History to belong to this class; and as the widely extended reputation of the author,-the undoubted learning of the work itself,-the frequent reference made to its pages by distinguished writers,-the long period during which it has been before the public,-its translation into English as early as the year 1800,-and its recent republication by an eminent American house,-all combine to form such a mass of evidence in its favor, as would, with most readers, prevent suspecion, we feel that we cannot render a more important service to them, than to examine into its merits, notice its errors, and guard them against its fallacious reasoning.

There are many strong reasons for subjecting works of this kind, on the Philosophy of History, to a diligent and cautious examination at the present time. A taste for profound historical investigation is gradually springing up; and what we now commend, in this department of letters, is required to be instinct with a spirit very different from that which would formerly have satisfied us. The late historical productions of France, Germany and England, give sufficient indications of this change, which, however, being as yet only in its commencemeut, has not been able to mould itself into a perfect or generally appreciable shape. The best of the recent writers of history have a dim and vague notion of something still wanting to complete their views; you can trace it in their occasional indecision and their frequent indistinctness; but they are only half conscious of the want, and, of necessity, remain unable to supply it. They are, indeed, striving to give form and development to their imperfect conceptions; but it will be impossible to achieve all that they desire, until they have a clear apprehension of the nature and extent of the deficiency, and of the means of removing it. This will explain the unsatisfactory character of all the productions of the present historical school. In reading the truly valuable works of Guizot, Cousin, Michelet, the Thierrys, Ranke, Arnold, &c., we are made but too sensible of their want of perfection. They give us glimpses into the very heart of a new science; but they have not mastered the science themselves, and they give us little more than glimpses. A deeper and more comprehensive philosophy, than we have met with in preceding authors, breathes through their pages, but they have as yet no full appreciation of it. They are haunted with a bright vision, which, in their waking moments, they

are unable wholly to recall; to borrow a quaint phrase from Statius, they have all been feeding on sacred darkness.* Even in the best passages of Guizot and Michelet,-certainly the most profound of these historians, we are rendered conscious of the deficiency; they have wooed Juno but embraced the cloud.

This vague and imperfect enunciation is naturally incident to the early promulgation of any new system, which is calculated to introduce a sweeping revolution. Such were the indistinct mutterings of philosophy, which proceeded from Telesius, Campanella, and Giordano Bruno, the great precursors of the greater Bacon. At the present moment, history is undergoing a change; it is on the eve of a great reformation. We see, from what has of late been produced, that it is now conceived in a very different spirit from that in which it was formerly written. In the highest functions of the historian, what are Hume and Robertson to Michelet, Thierry and Guizot? The first great name may have been a more elegant and pleasing writer than any one whom modern times have to compare with him, but where is the like spirit of comprehensive philosophy? Since the days of Lord Bacon, and especially since those of Sir Isaac Newton, the physical sciences have been so highly cultivated as to throw into the shade all the other departments of human knowledge. From the indications around us, it would seem, that the ethical sciences are likely soon to claim their due position, and that history is preparing to assert its right to be regarded as the highest and most comprehensive of these. But the change now in progress is essential before it can do this. A revolution in our modes of thought has led, or rather, is now leading us to more extended views; but these views must be completed before any thing permanent can be satisfactorily achieved. As vet, we are walking in the twilight, and many things appear of distorted or disproportionate shapes. We may not, therefore, reprehend the pioneers of the new route, because they have not discovered all that subsequent settlers may have it in their power to discover, or may have exaggerated some of the objects in their path, or mistaken the bearings of others. Let us rather be grateful for the assistance which we may derive even from their imperfect labors, and

« Anterior Continuar »

Libros

Southern Quarterly Review, Volumen5