Abbildungen der Seite
PDF
EPUB

have no Thucydides or Thuanus. The partiality of Hume is discreditable to philosophy; but if he is partial on the one side, Brodie, Godwin and some late writers are fully as much so on the other. An impartial history (particularly of the House of Stuart) is undoubtedly still wanting in our literature. With respect to the present work, it would not be safe to say that it is perfectly free from error, or that prejudice may not have affected some of the statements; but I can truly assert that the influence of this principle has been imperceptible to myself, and most certainly I have never wilfully suppressed or distorted the truth.

My situation I conceive to be favourable for the discovery and delivery of truth in history. I belong to no sect or party, in religion or politics. A member of the Church of England, I give it in my mind a moderate preference to any other, without taking on me to assert that it is absolutely the best; in politics, it is to me personally a matter of perfect indifference what party has the disposal of the patronage of the state, for place or pension I neither desire nor want, and would not accept. Perhaps this forms as near an approach as may be to the paradoxical character of a good historian-that“ il ne faudroit être d'aucune religion, d'aucun pays, d'aucune profession, d'aucun parti.”

The plan on which this history has been written is as follows. The events of the early periods and that of the Plantagenets have been related with such details as were

requisite to give them interest. The Tudor period, being that of the great transition in government and religion, has naturally been treated at tolerable length; while all the space that could be obtained within the prescribed limits has been devoted to the most important, the most interesting, annals of the House of Stuart. Contrary to the general practice, the portion allotted to the House of Brunswick is of less extent than those given to the two preceding periods. This plan I adopted on mature deliberation, before a single page of the work was written, and for the following reasons.

The probability is, that the greater number of the readers of the present work will never have leisure, or perhaps inclination, to read a more voluminous narrative. If, therefore, they did not meet the events of the early history here they might remain ignorant of them. The same reason applies with still greater force to the far more important period of the Tudors. Thus far however there is, comparatively speaking, little difference among protestant writers : but with the Stuarts commences the war of prejudice; the conflict of parties then began which has ever since continued, and to the narrator of it may justly be said,

Periculosæ plenum opus aleæ
Tractas, et incedis per ignes

Suppositos cineri doloso.

Here then, if anywhere, details are absolutely necessary; the testimonies of opposing parties must be produced, and events be stated with all their circumstances. With the accession of the House of Brunswick the great political contest terminated. The history henceforth consists chiefly of the struggles of Whigs and Tories for place, with its patronage and emoluments, of debates in parliament, and of long and scientific foreign wars. All these, to be interesting, or even intelligible, must be narrated in long detail, and to do so would be quite subversive of the plan of the present work. With respect to wars, and battles by sea and land, I remember and approve of the advice on this head given by duke Schomberg to bishop Burnet; and I fully agree with Horace Walpole as to the wisdom of those who are not professional men, attempting to detail the extensive combinations and complex evolutions of the warfare of the eighteenth century. To confess the truth, I have tried in vain to comprehend the battles of Blenheim and Malplaquet in Coxe, and even those of Salamanca and Vittoria in Napier are not perfectly clear to me. There must be maps and plans, and a familiarity with military terms, which few readers possess, before we can understand them. The same holds good of naval engagements. There are moreover so many lives of Washington, Wellington, Nelson, and other generals and admirals, and so many narratives of the more interesting portions of the reigns of the Georges, that probably by many readers the bird's-eye view of them here given will be preferred to a more ample narrative. Should, however, this reasoning not prove satisfactory, I

must bow to the public decision, and extend the work in a future edition, if such should be called for.

I have seldom referred to any of the late writers on the History of England, except Mackintosh and Lingard. The profound, but rather rhetorical, reflections of the former I have occasionally transferred to my pages, and I have felt it incumbent on me to point out what I regard as the erroneous statements of the latter. Dr. Lingard's work is evidently connected with the efforts which the Church of Rome (of which he is a clergyman) is making to recover its ground in this country. His object is to prove that the Reformation was needless, as the preceding state of religion required no improvement,—and pernicious, as it was injurious to morality, and originated in vicious motives. On these points I think quite differently. At the same time I most freely acknowledge the industry, sagacity, clearness, animation of style, and other merits of Dr. Lingard. I have made him my principal guide in my history of the Plantagenets, and I think he has treated that of the Stuarts more impartially than any other historian of the present day. I bear him or his church no malice, but I must defend the interests of protestantism where it is unjustly assailed.

I may here inform the reader that the present history is not a mere compilation or abridgement. In the early part I have derived my materials directly from the Saxon Chronicle and the other original authorities. I have then taken Lingard as my chief guide, (where his religion was not concerned,) but with a constant reference to the authorities. From the accession of the House of Tudor I have trusted only to contemporary writers, most of whom I have read, and all of whom I have frequently consulted. Instead of mere references, the very words of an authority are often placed in the text, by which practice space is saved, and the reader is enabled to judge for himself.

An edition of this work, in duodecimo, for the use of schools, has already appeared ; but it will be found that the additions made to the present one are very considerable, which it is hoped, with the superiority of form, paper and print, will render it acceptable to those for whose use it is designed.

T. K.

London, October 7th, 1839.

« ZurückWeiter »