哲学史-philosophy of history(英文版)-第3部分

按键盘上方向键 ← 或 → 可快速上下翻页，按键盘上的 Enter 键可回到本书目录页，按键盘上方向键 ↑ 可回到本页顶部！
————未阅读完？加入书签已便下次继续阅读！


by　their　countrymen；　and　which　formed　their　own　character；　they　record　their　views　of　their
political　relations；　and　of　their　moral　and　spiritual　nature；　and　the　principle　of　their　designs　and
conduct。　What　the　historian　puts　into　their　mouths　is　no　supposititious　system　of　ideas；　but　an
uncorrupted　transcript　of　their　intellectual　and　moral　habitudes。　

　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　§　4

Of　these　historians；　whom　we　must　make　thoroughly　our　own；　with　whom　we　must　linger　long；　if
we　would　live　with　their　respective　nations；　and　enter　deeply　into　their　spirit：　of　these　historians；　to
whose　pages　we　may　turn　not　for　the　purpose　of　erudition　merely；　but　with　a　view　to　deep　and
genuine　enjoyment；　there　are　fewer　than　might　be　imagined。　Herodotus　the　Father；　i。e。　the
Founder　of　History　and　Thucydides　have　been　already　mentioned。　Xenophon's　Retreat　of　the
Ten　Thousand　is　a　work　equally　original。　Caesar's　mentaries　are　the　simple　masterpiece　of
a　mighty　spirit。　Among　the　ancients；　these　annalists　were　necessarily　great　captains　and　statesmen。
In　the　Middle　Ages；　if　we　except　the　Bishops；　who　were　placed　in　the　very　centre　of　the　political
world；　the　Monks　monopolise　this　category　as　naive　chroniclers　who　were　as　decidedly　isolated
from　active　life　as　those　elder　annalists　had　been　connected　with　it。　In　modern　times　the　relations
are　entirely　altered。　Our　culture　is　essentially　prehensive　and　immediately　changes　all　events
into　historical　representations。　Belonging　to　the　class　in　question；　we　have　vivid；　simple；　clear
narrations　—　especially　of　military　transactions　—　which　might　fairly　take　their　place　with　those　of
Caesar。　In　richness　of　matter　and　fullness　of　detail　as　regards　strategic　appliances；　and　attendant
circumstances；　they　are　even　more　instructive。　The　French　〃Memoires〃　also　fall　under　this
category。　In　many　cases　these　are　written　by　men　of　mark；　though　relating　to　affairs　of　little　note。
They　not　unfrequently　contain　a　large　proportion　of　anecdotal　matter；　so　that　the　ground　they
occupy　is　narrow　and　trivial。　Yet　they　are　often　veritable　masterpieces　in　history；　as　those　of
Cardinal　Retz；　which　in　fact　trench　on　a　larger　historical　field。　In　Germany　such　masters　are　rare。
Frederick　the　Great　（Histoire　de　mon　temps）　is　an　illustrious　exception。　Writers　of　this　order
must　occupy　an　elevated　position。　Only　from　such　a　position　is　it　possible　to　take　an　extensive
view　of　affairs　—　to　see　everything。　This　is　out　of　the　question　for　him；　who　from　below　merely
gets　a　glimpse　of　the　great　world　through　a　miserable　cranny。　




II。　Reflective　History

　　　　　　　　　　　　　1。　Universal　History　…　2。　Pragmatical　History　…　3。　Critical　History　



　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　§　5

The　second　kind　of　history　we　may　call　the　reflective。　It　is　history　whose　mode　of　representation
is　not　really　confined　by　the　limits　of　the　time　to　which　it　relates；　but　whose　spirit　transcends　the
present。　In　this　second　order　strongly　marked　variety　of　species　may　be　distinguished。　

　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　1。　Universal　History

　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　§　6

It　is　the　aim　of　the　investigator　to　gain　a　view　of　the　entire　history　of　a　people　or　a　country；　or　of
the　world；　in　short；　what　we　call　Universal　History。　In　this　case　the　working　up　of　the　historical
material　is　the　main　point。　The　workman　approaches　his　task　with　his　own　spirit；　a　spirit　distinct
from　that　of　the　element　he　is　to　manipulate。　Here　a　very　important　consideration　will　be　the
principles　to　which　the　author　refers；　the　bearing　and　motives　of　the　actions　and　events　which　he
describes；　and　those　which　determine　the　form　of　his　narrative。　Among　us　Germans　this　reflective
treatment　and　the　display　of　ingenuity　which　it　occasions；　assume　a　manifold　variety　of　phases。
Every　writer　of　history　proposes　to　himself　an　original　method。　The　English　and　French　confess　to
general　principles　of　historical　position。　Their　standpoint　is　more　that　of　cosmopolitan　or　of
national　culture。　Among　us　each　labours　to　invent　a　purely　individual　point　of　view。　Instead　of
writing　history；　we　are　always　beating　our　brains　to　discover　how　history　ought　to　be　written。　This
first　kind　of　Reflective　History　is　most　nearly　akin　to　the　preceding；　when　it　has　no　farther　aim　than
to　present　the　annals　of　a　country　plete。　Such　pilations　（among　which　may　be　reckoned
the　works　of　Livy；　Diodorus　Siculus；　Johannes　von　Müller's　History　of　Switzerland）　are；　if　well
performed；　highly　meritorious。　Among　the　best　of　the　kind　may　be　reckoned　such　annalist　as
approach　those　of　the　first　class；　who　give　so　vivid　a　transcript　of　events　that　the　reader　may　well
fancy　himself　listening　to　contemporaries　and　eye…witnesses。　But　it　often　happens　that　the
individuality　of　tone　which　must　characterise　a　writer　belonging　to　a　different　culture；　is　not
modified　in　accordance　with　the　periods　such　a　record　must　traverse。　The　spirit　of　the　writer　is
quite　other　than　that　of　the　times　of　which　he　treats。　Thus　Livy　puts　into　the　mouths　of　the　old
Roman　kings；　consuls；　and　generals；　such　orations　as　would　be　delivered　by　an　acplished
advocate　of　the　Livian　era；　and　which　strikingly　contrast　with　the　genuine　traditions　of　Roman
antiquity　（e。g。　the　fable　of　Menenius　Agrippa）。　In　the　same　way　he　gives　us　descriptions　of　battles；
as　if　he　bad　been　an　actual　spectator；　but　whose　features　would　serve　well　enough　for　battles　in
any　period；　and　whose　distinctness　contrasts　on　the　other　hand　with　the　want　of　connection　and
the　inconsistency　that　prevail　elsewhere；　even　in　his　treatment　of　chief　points　of　interest。　The
difference　between　such　a　piler　and　an　original　historian　may　be　best　seen　by　paring
Polybius　himself　with　the　style　in　which　Livy　uses；　expands；　and　abridges　his　annals　in　those
period；　of　which　Polybius's　account　has　been　preserved。　Johann　von　Müller　has　given　a　stiff；
formal；　pedantic　aspect　of　history；　in　the　endeavour　to　remain　faithful　in　his　portraiture　to　the　times
he　describes。　We　much　prefer　the　narratives　we　find　in　old　Tschudy。　All　is　more　naive　and　natural
than　it　appears　in　the　garb　of　a　fictitious　and　affected　archaism。　

　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　§　7

A　history　which　aspires　to　traverse　long　periods　of　time；　or　to　be　universal；　must　indeed　forego　the
attempt　to　give　individual　representations　of　the　past　as　it　actually　existed。　It　must　foreshorten　its
pictures　by　abstractions；　and　this　includes　not　merely　the　omission　of　events　and　deeds；　but
whatever　is　involved　in　the　fact　that　Thought　is；　after　all；　the　most　trenchant　epitomist。　A　battle；　a
great　victory；　a　siege；　no　longer　maintains　its　original　proportions；　but　is　put　off　with　a　bare
mention。　When　Livy　e。g。　tells　us　of　the　wars　with　the　Volsci；　we　sometimes　have　the　brief
announcement：　“This　year　war　was　carried　on　with　the　Volsci。”　

　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　2。　Pragmatical　History

　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　§　8

A　second　species　of　Reflective　History　is　what　we　may　call　the　Pragmatical。　When　we　have　to
deal　with　the　Past；　and　occupy　ourselves　with　a　remote　world　a　Present　rises　into　being　for　the
mind　…　produced　by　its　own　activity；　as　the　reward　of　its　labour。　The　occurrences　are；　indeed；
various；　but　the　idea　which　pervades　them　…　their　deeper　import　and　connection　…　is　one。　This
takes　the　occurrence　out　of　the　category　of　the　Past　and　makes　it　virtually　Present。　Pragmatical
（didactic）　reflections；　though　in　their　nature　decidedly　abstract；　are　truly　and　indefeasibly　of　the
Present；　and　quicken　the　annals　of　the　dead　Past　with　the　life　of　today。　Whether；　indeed　such
reflections　are　truly　interesting　and　enlivening；　depends　on　the　writer's　own　spirit。　Moral　reflections
must　here　be　specially　noticed；　…　the　moral　teaching　expected　from　history；　which　latter　has　not
unfrequently　been　treated　with　a　direct　view　to　the　former。　It　may　be　allowed　that　examples　of
virtue　elevate　the　soul；　and　are　applicable　in　the　moral　instructions　of　children　for　impressing
excellence　upon　their　minds。　But　the　destinies　of　peoples　and　states；　their　interests；　relations；　and
the　plicated　issue　of　their　affairs；　present　quite　another　field。　Rulers；　Statesmen；　Nations；　are
wont　to　be　emphatically　mended　to　the　teaching　which　experience　offers　in　history。　But　what
experience　and　history　teach　is　this；　…　that　peoples　and　governments　never　have　learned　anything
from　history；　or　acted　on　principles　deduced　from　it。　Each　period　is　involved　in　such　peculiar
circumstances；　exhibits　a　condition　of　things　so　strictly　idiosyncratic；　that　its　conduct　must　be
regulated　by　considerations　connected　with　itself；　and　itself　alone。　Amid　the　pressure　of　great
events；　a　general　principle　gives　no　help。　It　is　useless　to　revert　to　similar　circumstances　in　the　Past。
The　pallid　shades　of　memory　struggle　in　vain　with　the　life　and　freedom　of　the　Present。　Looked　at　in
this　light；　nothing　can　be　shallower　than　the　oft…repeated　appeal　to　Greek　and　Roman　examples
during　the　French　Revolution。　Nothing　is　more　diverse　than　the　genius　of　those　nations　and　that　of
our　times。　Johannes　v。　Müller；　in　his　Universal　History　as　also　in　his　History　of　Switzerland；　had
such　mora