essays and lectures-第11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！



return；　is　not　yet　exhausted。　　There　is　another　aspect　in　which　it

may　be　regarded；　and　I　shall　now　proceed　to　treat　of　it。



One　of　the　greatest　difficulties　with　which　the　modern　historian

has　to　contend　is　the　enormous　complexity　of　the　facts　which　come

under　his　notice：　　D'Alembert's　suggestion　that　at　the　end　of　every

century　a　selection　of　facts　should　be　made　and　the　rest　burned　（if

it　was　really　intended　seriously）　could　not；　of　course；　be

entertained　for　a　moment。　　A　problem　loses　all　its　value　when　it

becomes　simplified；　and　the　world　would　be　all　the　poorer　if　the

Sibyl　of　History　burned　her　volumes。　　Besides；　as　Gibbon　pointed

out；　'a　Montesquieu　will　detect　in　the　most　insignificant　fact

relations　which　the　vulgar　overlook。'



Nor　can　the　scientific　investigator　of　history　isolate　the

particular　elements；　which　he　desires　to　examine；　from　disturbing

and　extraneous　causes；　as　the　experimental　chemist　can　do　（though

sometimes；　as　in　the　case　of　lunatic　asylums　and　prisons；　he　is

enabled　to　observe　phenomena　in　a　certain　degree　of　isolation）。　　So

he　is　compelled　either　to　use　the　deductive　mode　of　arguing　from

general　laws　or　to　employ　the　method　of　abstraction；　which　gives　a

fictitious　isolation　to　phenomena　never　so　isolated　in　actual

existence。　　And　this　is　exactly　what　Polybius　has　done　as　well　as

Thucydides。　　For；　as　has　been　well　remarked；　there　is　in　the　works

of　these　two　writers　a　certain　plastic　unity　of　type　and　motive；

whatever　they　write　is　penetrated　through　and　through　with　a

specific　quality；　a　singleness　and　concentration　of　purpose；　which

we　may　contrast　with　the　more　comprehensive　width　as　manifested　not

merely　in　the　modern　mind；　but　also　in　Herodotus。　　Thucydides；

regarding　society　as　influenced　entirely　by　political　motives；　took

no　account　of　forces　of　a　different　nature；　and　consequently　his

results；　like　those　of　most　modern　political　economists；　have　to　be

modified　largely　（20）　before　they　come　to　correspond　with　what　we

know　was　the　actual　state　of　fact。　　Similarly；　Polybius　will　deal

only　with　those　forces　which　tended　to　bring　the　civilised　world

under　the　dominion　of　Rome　（ix。　1）；　and　in　the　Thucydidean　spirit

points　out　the　want　of　picturesqueness　and　romance　in　his　pages

which　is　the　result　of　the　abstract　method　（＇Greek　text　which

cannot　be　reproduced＇）　being　careful　also　to　tell　us　that　his

rejection　of　all　other　forces　is　essentially　deliberate　and　the

result　of　a　preconceived　theory　and　by　no　means　due　to　carelessness

of　any　kind。



Now；　of　the　general　value　of　the　abstract　method　and　the　legality

of　its　employment　in　the　sphere　of　history；　this　is　perhaps　not　the

suitable　occasion　for　any　discussion。　　It　is；　however；　in　all　ways

worthy　of　note　that　Polybius　is　not　merely　conscious　of；　but　dwells

with　particular　weight　on；　the　fact　which　is　usually　urged　as　the

strongest　objection　to　the　employment　of　the　abstract　method　…　I

mean　the　conception　of　a　society　as　a　sort　of　human　organism　whose

parts　are　indissolubly　connected　with　one　another　and　all　affected

when　one　member　is　in　any　way　agitated。　　This　conception　of　the

organic　nature　of　society　appears　first　in　Plato　and　Aristotle；　who

apply　it　to　cities。　　Polybius；　as　his　wont　is；　expands　it　to　be　a

general　characteristic　of　all　history。　　It　is　an　idea　of　the　very

highest　importance；　especially　to　a　man　like　Polybius　whose

thoughts　are　continually　turned　towards　the　essential　unity　of

history　and　the　impossibility　of　isolation。



Farther；　as　regards　the　particular　method　of　investigating　that

group　of　phenomena　obtained　for　him　by　the　abstract　method；　he　will

adopt；　he　tells　us；　neither　the　purely　deductive　nor　the　purely

inductive　mode　but　the　union　of　both。　　In　other　words；　he　formally

adopts　that　method　of　analysis　upon　the　importance　of　which　I　have

dwelt　before。



And　lastly；　while；　without　doubt；　enormous　simplicity　in　the

elements　under　consideration　is　the　result　of　the　employment　of　the

abstract　method；　even　within　the　limit　thus　obtained　a　certain

selection　must　be　made；　and　a　selection　involves　a　theory。　　For　the

facts　of　life　cannot　be　tabulated　with　as　great　an　ease　as　the

colours　of　birds　and　insects　can　be　tabulated。　　Now；　Polybius

points　out　that　those　phenomena　particularly　are　to　be　dwelt　on

which　may　serve　as　a　＇Greek　text　which　cannot　be　reproduced＇　or

sample；　and　show　the　character　of　the　tendencies　of　the　age　as

clearly　as　'a　single　drop　from　a　full　cask　will　be　enough　to

disclose　the　nature　of　the　whole　contents。'　　This　recognition　of

the　importance　of　single　facts；　not　in　themselves　but　because　of

the　spirit　they　represent；　is　extremely　scientific；　for　we　know

that　from　the　single　bone；　or　tooth　even；　the　anatomist　can

recreate　entirely　the　skeleton　of　the　primeval　horse；　and　the

botanist　tell　the　character　of　the　flora　and　fauna　of　a　district

from　a　single　specimen。



Regarding　truth　as　'the　most　divine　thing　in　Nature；'　the　very　'eye

and　light　of　history　without　which　it　moves　a　blind　thing；'

Polybius　spared　no　pains　in　the　acquisition　of　historical　materials

or　in　the　study　of　the　sciences　of　politics　and　war；　which　he

considered　were　so　essential　to　the　training　of　the　scientific

historian；　and　the　labour　he　took　is　mirrored　in　the　many　ways　in

which　he　criticises　other　authorities。



There　is　something；　as　a　rule；　slightly　contemptible　about　ancient

criticism。　　The　modern　idea　of　the　critic　as　the　interpreter；　the

expounder　of　the　beauty　and　excellence　of　the　work　he　selects；

seems　quite　unknown。　　Nothing　can　be　more　captious　or　unfair；　for

instance；　than　the　method　by　which　Aristotle　criticised　the　ideal

state　of　Plato　in　his　ethical　works；　and　the　passages　quoted　by

Polybius　from　Timaeus　show　that　the　latter　historian　fully　deserved

the　punning　name　given　to　him。　　But　in　Polybius　there　is；　I　think；

little　of　that　bitterness　and　pettiness　of　spirit　which

characterises　most　other　writers；　and　an　incidental　story　he　tells

of　his　relations　with　one　of　the　historians　whom　he　criticised

shows　that　he　was　a　man　of　great　courtesy　and　refinement　of　taste　…

as；　indeed；　befitted　one　who　had　lived　always　in　the　society　of

those　who　were　of　great　and　noble　birth。



Now；　as　regards　the　character　of　the　canons　by　which　he　criticises

the　works　of　other　authors；　in　the　majority　of　cases　he　employs

simply　his　own　geographical　and　military　knowledge；　showing；　for

instance；　the　impossibility　in　the　accounts　given　of　Nabis's　march

from　Sparta　simply　by　his　acquaintance　with　the　spots　in　question；

or　the　inconsistency　of　those　of　the　battle　of　Issus；　or　of　the

accounts　given　by　Ephorus　of　the　battles　of　Leuctra　and　Mantinea。

In　the　latter　case　he　says；　if　any　one　will　take　the　trouble　to

measure　out　the　ground　of　the　site　of　the　battle　and　then　test　the

manoeuvres　given；　he　will　find　how　inaccurate　the　accounts　are。



In　other　cases　he　appeals　to　public　documents；　the　importance　of

which　he　was　always　foremost　in　recognising；　showing；　for　instance；

by　a　document　in　the　public　archives　of　Rhodes　how　inaccurate　were

the　accounts　given　of　the　battle　of　Lade　by　Zeno　and　Antisthenes。

Or　he　appeals　to　psychological　probability；　rejecting；　for

instance；　the　scandalous　stories　told　of　Philip　of　Macedon；　simply

from　the　king's　general　greatness　of　character；　and　arguing　that　a

boy　so　well　educated　and　so　respectably　connected　as　Demochares

（xii。　14）　could　never　have　been　guilty　of　that　of　which　evil　rumour

accused　him。



But　the　chief　object　of　his　literary　censure　is　Timaeus；　who　had

been　unsparing　of　his　strictures　on　others。　　The　general　point

which　he　makes　against　him；　impugning　his　accuracy　as　a　historian；

is　that　he　derived　his　knowledge　of　history　not　from　the　dangerous

perils　of　a　life　of　action　but　in　the　secure　indolence　of　a　narrow

scholastic　life。　　There　is；　indeed；　no　point　on　which　he　is　so

vehement　as　this。　　'A　history；'　he　says；　'written　in　a　library

gives　as　lifeless　and　as　inaccurate　a　picture　of　history　as　a

painting　which　is　copied　not　from　a　living　animal　but　from　a

stuffed　one。'



There　is　more　difference；　he　says　in　another　place；　between　the

history　of　an　eye…witness　and　that　of　one　whose　knowledge　comes

from　books；　than　there　is　between　the　scenes　of　real　life　and　the

fictitious　landscapes　of　theatrical　scenery。　　Besides　this；　he

enters　into　somewhat　elaborate　detailed　criticism　of　passages　where

he　thought　Timaeus　was　following　a　wrong　method　and　perverting

truth；　passages　which　it　will　be　worth　while　to　examine　in　detail。



Timaeus；　from　the　fact　of　there　being　a　Roman　custom　to　shoot　a

war…horse　on　a　stated　day；　argued　back　to　the　Trojan　origin　of　that

people。　　Polybius；　on　the　other　hand；　points　out　that　the　inference

is　quite　unwarrantable；　because　horse…sacrifices　are　ordinary

institutions　common　to　all　barbarous　tribes。　　Timaeus　here；　as　was

common　with　Greek　writers；　is　arguing　back　from　some　custom　of　the

present　to　an　historical　event　in　the　past。　　Polybius　really　is

employing　the　comparative　method；　showing　how　the　custom　was　an

ordinary　step　in　the　civilisation　of　every　early　people。



In　another　place；　（21）　he　shows　how　illogical　is　the　scepticism　of

Timaeus　as　regards　the　existence　of　the　Bull　of　Phalaris　simply　by

appealing　to　the　statue　of　the　Bull；　which　was　still　to　be　seen　in

Carthage；　pointing　out　how　impossible　it　was；　on　any　other　theory

except　that　it　belonged　to　Phalaris；　to　account　for　the　presence　in

Carthage　of　a　bull　of　this　peculiar　character　with　a　door　between

his　shoulders。　　But　one　of　the　great　points　which　he　uses　against

this　Sicilian　historian　is　in　reference　to　the　question　of　the

origin　of　the　Locrian　colony。　　In　accordance　with　the　received

tradition　on　the　subject；　Aristotle　had　represented　the　Locrian

colony　as　founded　by　some　Parthenidae　or　slaves'　children；　as　they

were　called；　a　statement　wh