By copious citations from the original authorities, and
by such critical notices of them as would explain to him the
influences to which they were subjected, I have endeavoured to
put him in a position for judging for himself, and thus for
revising, and, if need be reversing, the judgments of the
historian. He will, at any rate, by this means, be enabled to
estimate the difficulty of arriving at truth amidst the conflict
of testimony; and he will learn to place little reliance on those
writers who pronounce on the mysterious past with what Fontenelle
calls "a frightful degree of certainty," - a spirit the most
opposite to that of the true philosophy of history.
Yet it must be admitted, that the chronicler who records the
events of an earlier age has some obvious advantages in the store
of manuscript materials at his command, - the statements of
friends, rivals, and enemies, furnishing a wholesome counterpoise
to each other; and also, in the general course of events, as they
actually occurred, affording the best commentary on the true
motives of the parties. The actor, engaged in the heat of the
strife, finds his view bounded by the circle around him, and his
vision blinded by the smoke and dust of the conflict; while the
spectator, whose eyes ranges over the ground from a more distant
and elevated point, though the individual objects may lose
somewhat of their vividness, takes in at a glance all the
operations of the field. Paradoxical as it may appear, truth
founded on contemporary testimony would seem, after all, as
likely to be attained by the writer of a later day, as by
contemporaries themselves.
Pages:
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26