essays and lectures-第2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!
own day; when Catiline and Clodius are represented as honest and
far…seeing politicians; when EINE EDLE UND GUTE NATUR is claimed
for Tiberius; and Nero is rescued from his heritage of infamy as an
accomplished DILETTANTE whose moral aberrations are more than
excused by his exquisite artistic sense and charming tenor voice。
But besides the allegorising principle of interpretation; and the
ethical reconstruction of history; there was a third theory; which
may be called the semi…historical; and which goes by the name of
Euhemeros; though he was by no means the first to propound it。
Appealing to a fictitious monument which he declared that he had
discovered in the island of Panchaia; and which purported to be a
column erected by Zeus; and detailing the incidents of his reign on
earth; this shallow thinker attempted to show that the gods and
heroes of ancient Greece were 'mere ordinary mortals; whose
achievements had been a good deal exaggerated and misrepresented;'
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 anothe