essays and lectures-第2章

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！



and　that　the　proper　canon　of　historical　criticism　as　regards　the

treatment　of　myths　was　to　rationalise　the　incredible；　and　to

present　the　plausible　residuum　as　actual　truth。



To　him　and　his　school；　the　centaurs；　for　instance；　those　mythical

sons　of　the　storm；　strange　links　between　the　lives　of　men　and

animals；　were　merely　some　youths　from　the　village　of　Nephele　in

Thessaly；　distinguished　for　their　sporting　tastes；　the　'living

harvest　of　panoplied　knights；'　which　sprang　so　mystically　from　the

dragon's　teeth；　a　body　of　mercenary　troops　supported　by　the　profits

on　a　successful　speculation　in　ivory；　and　Actaeon；　an　ordinary

master　of　hounds；　who；　living　before　the　days　of　subscription；　was

eaten　out　of　house　and　home　by　the　expenses　of　his　kennel。



Now；　that　under　the　glamour　of　myth　and　legend　some　substratum　of

historical　fact　may　lie；　is　a　proposition　rendered　extremely

probable　by　the　modern　investigations　into　the　workings　of　the

mythopoeic　spirit　in　post…Christian　times。　　Charlemagne　and　Roland；

St。　Francis　and　William　Tell；　are　none　the　less　real　personages

because　their　histories　are　filled　with　much　that　is　fictitious　and

incredible；　but　in　all　cases　what　is　essentially　necessary　is　some

external　corroboration；　such　as　is　afforded　by　the　mention　of

Roland　and　Roncesvalles　in　the　chronicles　of　England；　or　（in　the

sphere　of　Greek　legend）　by　the　excavations　of　Hissarlik。　　But　to

rob　a　mythical　narrative　of　its　kernel　of　supernatural　elements；

and　to　present　the　dry　husk　thus　obtained　as　historical　fact；　is；

as　has　been　well　said；　to　mistake　entirely　the　true　method　of

investigation　and　to　identify　plausibility　with　truth。



And　as　regards　the　critical　point　urged　by　Palaiphatos；　Strabo；　and

Polybius；　that　pure　invention　on　Homer's　part　is　inconceivable；　we

may　without　scruple　allow　it；　for　myths；　like　constitutions；　grow

gradually；　and　are　not　formed　in　a　day。　　But　between　a　poet's

deliberate　creation　and　historical　accuracy　there　is　a　wide　field

of　the　mythopoeic　faculty。



This　Euhemeristic　theory　was　welcomed　as　an　essentially

philosophical　and　critical　method　by　the　unscientific　Romans；　to

whom　it　was　introduced　by　the　poet　Ennius；　that　pioneer　of

cosmopolitan　Hellenicism；　and　it　continued　to　characterise　the　tone

of　ancient　thought　on　the　question　of　the　treatment　of　mythology

till　the　rise　of　Christianity；　when　it　was　turned　by　such　writers

as　Augustine　and　Minucius　Felix　into　a　formidable　weapon　of　attack

on　Paganism。　　It　was　then　abandoned　by　all　those　who　still　bent　the

knee　to　Athena　or　to　Zeus；　and　a　general　return；　aided　by　the

philosophic　mystics　of　Alexandria；　to　the　allegorising　principle　of

interpretation　took　place；　as　the　only　means　of　saving　the　deities

of　Olympus　from　the　Titan　assaults　of　the　new　Galilean　God。　　In

what　vain　defence；　the　statue　of　Mary　set　in　the　heart　of　the

Pantheon　can　best　tell　us。



Religions；　however；　may　be　absorbed；　but　they　never　are　disproved；

and　the　stories　of　the　Greek　mythology；　spiritualised　by　the

purifying　influence　of　Christianity；　reappear　in　many　of　the

southern　parts　of　Europe　in　our　own　day。　　The　old　fable　that　the

Greek　gods　took　service　with　the　new　religion　under　assumed　names

has　more　truth　in　it　than　the　many　care　to　discover。



Having　now　traced　the　progress　of　historical　criticism　in　the

special　treatment　of　myth　and　legend；　I　shall　proceed　to

investigate　the　form　in　which　the　same　spirit　manifested　itself　as

regards　what　one　may　term　secular　history　and　secular　historians。

The　field　traversed　will　be　found　to　be　in　some　respects　the　same；

but　the　mental　attitude；　the　spirit；　the　motive　of　investigation

are　all　changed。



There　were　heroes　before　the　son　of　Atreus　and　historians　before

Herodotus；　yet　the　latter　is　rightly　hailed　as　the　father　of

history；　for　in　him　we　discover　not　merely　the　empirical　connection

of　cause　and　effect；　but　that　constant　reference　to　Laws；　which　is

the　characteristic　of　the　historian　proper。



For　all　history　must　be　essentially　universal；　not　in　the　sense　of

comprising　all　the　synchronous　events　of　the　past　time；　but　through

the　universality　of　the　principles　employed。　　And　the　great

conceptions　which　unify　the　work　of　Herodotus　are　such　as　even

modern　thought　has　not　yet　rejected。　　The　immediate　government　of

the　world　by　God；　the　nemesis　and　punishment　which　sin　and　pride

invariably　bring　with　them；　the　revealing　of　God's　purpose　to　His

people　by　signs　and　omens；　by　miracles　and　by　prophecy；　these　are

to　Herodotus　the　laws　which　govern　the　phenomena　of　history。　　He　is

essentially　the　type　of　supernatural　historian；　his　eyes　are　ever

strained　to　discern　the　Spirit　of　God　moving　over　the　face　of　the

waters　of　life；　he　is　more　concerned　with　final　than　with　efficient

causes。



Yet　we　can　discern　in　him　the　rise　of　that　HISTORIC　SENSE　which　is

the　rational　antecedent　of　the　science　of　historical　criticism；　the

＇Greek　text　which　cannot　be　reproduced＇；　to　use　the　words　of　a

Greek　writer；　as　opposed　to　that　which　comes　either　＇Greek　text

which　cannot　be　reproduced＇。



He　has　passed　through　the　valley　of　faith　and　has　caught　a　glimpse

of　the　sunlit　heights　of　Reason；　but　like　all　those　who；　while

accepting　the　supernatural；　yet　attempt　to　apply　the　canons　of

rationalism；　he　is　essentially　inconsistent。　　For　the　better

apprehension　of　the　character　of　this　historic　sense　in　Herodotus

it　will　be　necessary　to　examine　at　some　length　the　various　forms　of

criticism　in　which　it　manifests　itself。



Such　fabulous　stories　as　that　of　the　Phoenix；　of　the　goat…footed

men；　of　the　headless　beings　with　eyes　in　their　breasts；　of　the　men

who　slept　six　months　in　the　year　（＇Greek　text　which　cannot　be

reproduced＇）；　of　the　wer…wolf　of　the　Neuri；　and　the　like；　are

entirely　rejected　by　him　as　being　opposed　to　the　ordinary

experience　of　life；　and　to　those　natural　laws　whose　universal

influence　the　early　Greek　physical　philosophers　had　already　made

known　to　the　world　of　thought。　　Other　legends；　such　as　the　suckling

of　Cyrus　by　a　bitch；　or　the　feather…rain　of　northern　Europe；　are

rationalised　and　explained　into　a　woman's　name　and　a　fall　of　snow。

The　supernatural　origin　of　the　Scythian　nation；　from　the　union　of

Hercules　and　the　monstrous　Echidna；　is　set　aside　by　him　for　the

more　probable　account　that　they　were　a　nomad　tribe　driven　by　the

Massagetae　from　Asia；　and　he　appeals　to　the　local　names　of　their

country　as　proof　of　the　fact　that　the　Kimmerians　were　the　original

possessors。



But　in　the　case　of　Herodotus　it　will　be　more　instructive　to　pass　on

from　points　like　these　to　those　questions　of　general　probability；

the　true　apprehension　of　which　depends　rather　on　a　certain　quality

of　mind　than　on　any　possibility　of　formulated　rules；　questions

which　form　no　unimportant　part　of　scientific　history；　for　it　must

be　remembered　always　that　the　canons　of　historical　criticism　are

essentially　different　from　those　of　judicial　evidence；　for　they

cannot；　like　the　latter；　be　made　plain　to　every　ordinary　mind；　but

appeal　to　a　certain　historical　faculty　founded　on　the　experience　of

life。　　Besides；　the　rules　for　the　reception　of　evidence　in　courts

of　law　are　purely　stationary；　while　the　science　of　historical

probability　is　essentially　progressive；　and　changes　with　the

advancing　spirit　of　each　age。



Now；　of　all　the　speculative　canons　of　historical　criticism；　none　is

more　important　than　that　which　rests　on　psychological　probability。



Arguing　from　his　knowledge　of　human　nature；　Herodotus　rejects　the

presence　of　Helen　within　the　walls　of　Troy。　　Had　she　been　there；　he

says；　Priam　and　his　kinsmen　would　never　have　been　so　mad　（＇Greek

text　which　cannot　be　reproduced＇）　as　not　to　give　her　up；　when　they

and　their　children　and　their　city　were　in　such　peril　（ii。　118）；　and

as　regards　the　authority　of　Homer；　some　incidental　passages　in　his

poem　show　that　he　knew　of　Helen's　sojourn　in　Egypt　during　the

siege；　but　selected　the　other　story　as　being　a　more　suitable　motive

for　an　epic。　　Similarly　he　does　not　believe　that　the　Alcmaeonidae

family；　a　family　who　had　always　been　the　haters　of　tyranny　（＇Greek

text　which　cannot　be　reproduced＇）；　and　to　whom；　even　more　than　to

Harmodios　and　Aristogeiton；　Athens　owed　its　liberty；　would　ever

have　been　so　treacherous　as　to　hold　up　a　shield　after　the　battle　of

Marathon　as　a　signal　for　the　Persian　host　to　fall　on　the　city。　　A

shield；　he　acknowledges；　was　held　up；　but　it　could　not　possibly

have　been　done　by　such　friends　of　liberty　as　the　house　of　Alcmaeon；

nor　will　he　believe　that　a　great　king　like　Rhampsinitus　would　have

sent　his　daughter　＇Greek　text　which　cannot　be　reproduced＇。



Elsewhere　he　argues　from　more　general　considerations　of

probability；　a　Greek　courtesan　like　Rhodopis　would　hardly　have　been

rich　enough　to　build　a　pyramid；　and；　besides；　on　chronological

grounds　the　story　is　impossible　（ii。　134）。



In　another　passage　（ii。　63）；　after　giving　an　account　of　the

forcible　entry　of　the　priests　of　Ares　into　the　chapel　of　the　god's

mother；　which　seems　to　have　been　a　sort　of　religious　faction　fight

where　sticks　were　freely　used　（＇Greek　text　which　cannot　be

reproduced＇）；　'I　feel　sure；'　he　says；　'that　many　of　them　died　from

getting　their　heads　broken；　notwithstanding　the　assertions　of　the

Egyptian　priests　to　the　contrary。'　　There　is　also　something

charmingly　naive　in　the　account　he　gives　of　the　celebrated　Greek

swimmer　who　dived　a　distance　of　eighty　stadia　to　give　his

countrymen　warning　of　the　Persian　advance。　　'If；　however；'　he　says；

'I　may　offer　an　opinion　on　the　subject；　I　would　say　that　he　came　in

a　boat。'



There　is；　of　course；　something　a　little　trivial　in　some　of　the

instances　I　have　quoted；　but　in　a　writer　like　Herodotus；　who　stands

on　the　borderland　between　faith　and　rationalism；　one　likes　to　note

even　the　most　minute　instances　of　the　rise　of　the　critical　and

sceptical　spirit　of　inquiry。



How　really　strange；　at　base；　it　was　with　him　may；　I　think；　be　shown

by　a　reference　to　those　passages　where　he　applies　rationalistic

tests　to　matters　connected　with　religion。　　He　nowhere；　indeed；

grapples　with　the　moral　and　scientific　difficulties　of　the　Greek

Bible；　and　where　he　rejects　as　incredible　the　marvellous

achievements　of　Hercules　in　Egypt；　he　does　so　on　the　express

grounds　that　he　had　not　yet　been　received　among　the　gods；　and　so

was　still　subject　to　the　ordinary　conditions　of　mortal　life　（＇Greek

text　which　cannot　be　reproduced＇）。



Even　within　these　limits；　however；　his　religious　conscience　seems

to　have　been　troubled　at　such　daring　rationalism；　and　the　passage

（ii。　45）　concludes　with　a　pious　hope　that　God　will　pardon　him　for

having　gone　so　far；　the　great　rationalistic　passage　being；　of

course；　that　in　which　he　rejects　the　mythical　account　of　the

foundation　of　Dodona。　　'How　can　a　dove　speak　with　a　human　voice？'

he　asks；　and　ratio