Yetitwastheunexpectedwhichoccurred;anditisinstructivetonotethat,evenattheperiodwhenthechampionsoftheolderthoughtweretoallappearanceimpregnablyintrenchedinEngland,awayhadbeenopenedintotheircitadel,andthatthemosteffectiveagentsinpreparingitwerereallytheverymenintheuniversitiesandcathedralchapterswhohadmostdistinguishedthemselvesbyuncompromisingandintolerantorthodoxy。
Arapidsurveyofthehistoryofgeneralliterarycriticismatthatepochwillrevealthisfactfully。DuringthelastdecadeoftheseventeenthcenturytherehadtakenplacethefamouscontroversyovertheLettersofPhalaris,inwhich,againstCharlesBoyleandhissupportersatOxford,waspittedRichardBentleyatCambridge,whoinsistedthattheletterswerespurious。Intheseriesofbattlesroyalwhichfollowed,althoughBoyle,aidedbyAtterbury,afterwardsonotedforhismingledecclesiasticalandpoliticalintrigues,hadgainedatemporarytriumphbywitandhumour,Bentley’sfinalattackhadprovedirresistible。Drawingfromthestoresofhiswonderfullywideandminuteknowledge,heshowedthattheletterscouldnothavebeenwritteninthetimeofPhalaris——provingthisbyanexhibitionoftheirstyle,whichcouldnotthenhavebeeninuse,oftheirreferencetoeventswhichhadnotthentakenplace,andofamassofconsiderationswhichnoonebutascholaralmostmiraculouslygiftedcouldhavemarshalledsofully。ThecontroversyhadattractedattentionnotonlyinEnglandbutthroughoutEurope。WithBentley’sreplyithadended。InspiteofpublicapplauseatAtterbury’swit,scholarsthroughouttheworldacknowledgedBentley’svictory:hewasrecognisedastheforemostclassicalscholarofhistime;themastershipofTrinity,whichheaccepted,andtheBristolbishopric,whichherejected,werehisformalreward。
Although,inhisnewpositionasheadofthegreatestcollegeinEngland,hewenttoextremelengthsontheorthodoxsideinbiblicaltheology,consentingeventosupportthedoctrinethattheHebrewpunctuationwasdivinelyinspired,thiswasasnothingcomparedwiththeinfluenceofthesystemofcriticismwhichheintroducedintoEnglishstudiesofclassicalliteratureinpreparingthewayfortheapplicationofasimilarsystemtoALL
literature,whethercalledsacredorprofane。
Uptothatperiodtherehadreallybeennoadequatecriticismofancientliterature。Whatevernamehadbeenattachedtoanyancientwritingwasusuallyacceptedasthenameoftheauthor:
whattextsshouldbeimputedtoanauthorwassettledgenerallyonauthority。ButwithBentleybegananewepoch。HisacuteintellectandexquisitetouchrevealedclearlytoEnglishscholarsthenewscienceofcriticism,andfamiliarizedthemindsofthinkingmenwiththeideathatthetextsofancientliteraturemustbesubmittedtothisscience。Henceforwardanewspiritreignedamongthebestclassicalscholars,propheticofmoreandmorelightinthegreaterfieldofsacredliterature。
Scholars,ofwhomPorsonwaschief,followedoutthismethod,andthoughattimes,asinPorson’sowncase,theywerewarnedoff,withmuchlossanddamage,fromtheapplicationofittothesacredtext,theykeptalivethebettertradition。
AhundredyearsafterBentley’smaineffortsappearedinGermanyanotherepoch-makingbook——Wolf’sIntroductiontoHomer。InthiswasbroachedthetheorythattheIliadandOdysseyarenottheworksofasinglegreatpoet,butaremadeupofballadliteraturewroughtintounitybymoreorlessskilfulediting。
InspiteofvariouschangesandphasesofopiniononthissubjectsinceWolf’sday,hedealtakillingblowattheideathatclassicalworksarenecessarilytobetakenatwhatmaybetermedtheirfacevalue。
Moreandmoreclearlyitwasseenthattheideasofearlycopyists,andevenofearlypossessorsofmasterpiecesinancientliterature,wereentirelydifferentfromthosetowhichthemodernworldisaccustomed。Itwasseenthatmanipulationsandinterpolationsinthetextbycopyistsandpossessorshadlongbeenconsiderednotmerelyvenialsins,butmattersofright,andthateventheissuingofwholebooksunderassumednameshadbeenpractisedfreely。
In1811alightakintothatthrownbyBentleyandWolfuponancientliteraturewasthrownbyNiebuhruponancienthistory。
InhisHistoryofRometheapplicationofscientificprinciplestotheexaminationofhistoricalsourceswasforthefirsttimeexhibitedlargelyandbrilliantly。Uptothatperiodthetime-honouredutterancesofancientauthoritieshadbeen,asarule,acceptedasfinal:nobreakingaway,evenfromthemostabsurdofthem,waslookeduponwithfavour,andanyonepresumingtogobehindthemwasregardedastroublesomeandevenasdangerous。
ThroughthissacredconventionalismNiebuhrbrokefearlessly,and,thoughattimesovercritical,hestruckfromtheearlyhistoryofRomeavastmassofaccretions,andgavetotheworldaresidueinfinitelymorevaluablethantheoriginalamalgamofmyth,legend,andchronicle。
Hismethodswereespeciallybroughttobearonstudents’historybyoneofthetruestmenandnoblestscholarsthattheEnglishracehasproduced——ArnoldofRugby——and,inspiteoftheinevitableheavyconservatism,wereallowedtodotheirworkinthefieldofancienthistoryaswellasinthatofancientclassicalliterature。
Theplaceofmythinhistorythusbecamemoreandmoreunderstood,andhistoricalfoundations,atleastsofarasSECULARhistorywasconcerned,werehenceforthdealtwithinascientificspirit。TheextensionofthisnewtreatmenttoALL
ancientliteratureandhistorywasnowsimplyamatteroftime。
Suchanextensionhadalreadybegun;forin1829hadappearedMilman’sHistoryoftheJews。InthisworkcameafurtherevolutionofthetruthsandmethodssuggestedbyBentley,Wolf,andNiebuhr,andtheirapplicationtosacredhistorywasmadestrikinglyevident。Milman,thoughaclergyman,treatedthehistoryofthechosenpeopleinthelightofmodernknowledgeofOrientalandespeciallyofSemiticpeoples。HeexhibitedsundrygreatbiblicalpersonagesofthewanderingdaysofIsraelassheiksoremirsorBedouinchieftains;andthetribesofIsraelasobedientthentothesamegenerallaws,customs,andideasgoverningwanderingtribesinthesameregionnow。HedealtwithconflictingsourcessomewhatinthespiritofBentley,andwiththemythical,legendary,andmiraculoussomewhatinthespiritofNiebuhr。ThistreatmentofthehistoryoftheJews,simplyasthedevelopmentofanOrientaltribe,raisedgreatopposition。
SuchchampionsoforthodoxyasBishopMantandDr。Faussettstraightwaytookthefield,andwithsucheffectthattheFamilyLibrary,averyvaluableseriesinwhichMilman’shistoryappeared,wasputundertheban,anditsfurtherpublicationstopped。ForyearsMilman,thoughamanofexquisiteliteraryandloftyhistoricalgifts,aswellasofmosthonourablecharacter,wasdebarredfromprefermentandoutstrippedbyecclesiasticsvastlyinferiortohimineverythingsaveworldlywisdom;foryearshewaspassedintheraceforhonoursbydivineswhowerecontenteithertoholdbriefsforallthecontemporaryunreasonwhichhappenedtobepopular,ortokeeptheirmouthsshutaltogether。Thisoppositiontohimextendedtohisworks。Formanyyearstheyweresneeredat,decried,andkeptfromthepublicasfaraspossible。
Fortunately,theprogressofeventsliftedhim,beforetheclosingyearsofhislife,aboveallthisopposition。AsDeanofSt。Paul’shereallyoutrankedthecontemporaryarchbishops:helivedtoseehismainideasaccepted,andhisHistoryofLatinChristianityreceivedascertainlyoneofthemostvaluable,andnolesscertainlythemostattractive,ofallChurchhistorieseverwritten。
ThetwogreatEnglishhistoriesofGreece——thatbyThirlwall,whichwasfinished,andthatbyGrote,whichwasbegun,inthemiddleyearsofthenineteenthcentury——cameintostrengthenthisnewdevelopment。Byapplicationofthecriticalmethodtohistoricalsources,bypointingoutmoreandmorefullytheinevitablepartplayedbymythandlegendinearlychronicles,bydisplayingmoreandmoreclearlytheeasewithwhichinterpolationsoftexts,falsificationsofstatements,andattributionstopretendedauthorsweremade,theypavedthewaystillfurthertowardajustandfruitfulstudyofsacredliterature。[480]
[480]ForMr。Gladstone’searlieropinion,seehisChurchandState,andMacaulay’sreviewofit。ForPusey,seeMozley,Ward,Newman’sApologia,DeanChurch,etc。,andespeciallyhisLife,byLiddon。Verycharacteristictouchesaregiveninvol。i,showingtheoriginofmanyofhisopinionsseeletteronp。184。ForthescandaloustreatmentofMr。EverettbytheclericalmobatOxford,seearatherjauntyaccountofthepreparationsandofthewholeperformanceinaletterwrittenatthetimefromOxfordbythelateDeanChurch,inTheLifeandLettersofDeanChurch,London,1894,pp。40,41。ForabriefbutexcellentsummaryofthecharacterandservicesofEverett,seeJ。F。Rhodes’sHistoryoftheUnitedStatesfromtheCompromiseof1850,NewYork,1893,vol。i,pp。291etseq。ForasuccinctandbrillianthistoryoftheBentley-Boylecontroversy,seeMacauley’sarticleonBentleyintheEncyclopaediaBritannica;alsoBeard’sHibbertLecturesfor1893,pp。344,345;alsoDissertationinBentley’swork,editedbyDyce,London,1836,vol。i,especiallythepreface。
ForWolf,seehisProlegomenaadHomerum,Halle,1795;foritseffects,seetheadmirablebriefstatementinBeard,asabove,p。
345。ForNiebuhr,seehisRomanHistory,translatedbyHareandThirlwall,London,1828;alsoBeard,asabove。ForMilman’sview,see,asaspecimen,hisHistoryoftheJews,lastedition,especiallypp。15-27。Foranobletributetohischaracter,seetheprefacetoLecky’sHistoryofEuropeanMorals。ForThirlwall,seehisHistoryofGreece,passim;alsohisletters;
alsohisChargeoftheBishopofSt。David’s,1863。
DowntothemiddleofthenineteenthcenturythetraditionallyorthodoxsideofEnglishscholarship,whileithadnotbeenabletomaintainanyeffectivequarantineagainstContinentalcriticismofclassicalliterature,hadbeenabletokeepupbarriersfairlystrongagainstContinentaldiscussionsofsacredliterature。Butinthesecondhalfofthenineteenthcenturythesebarrierswerebrokenatmanypoints,and,thestreamofGermanthoughtbeingunitedwiththecurrentofdevotiontotruthinEngland,thereappearedearlyin1860amodestvolumeentitledEssaysandReviews。Thisworkdiscussedsundryoftheoldertheologicalpositionswhichhadbeenrendereduntenablebymodernresearch,andbroughttobearuponthemtheviewsofthenewerschoolofbiblicalinterpretation。Theauthorswere,asarule,scholarsintheprimeoflife,holdinginfluentialpositionsintheuniversitiesandpublicschools。Theywereseven——thefirstbeingDr。Temple,asuccessorofArnoldatRugby;andtheothers,theRev。Dr。RowlandWilliams,Prof。BadenPowell,theRev。H。
B。Wilson,Mr。C。W。Goodwin,theRev。MarkPattison,andtheRev。Prof。Jowett——theonlyoneofthesevennotinholyordersbeingGoodwin。Allthearticleswereimportant,thoughthefirst,byTemple,onTheEducationoftheWorld,andthelast,byJowett,onTheInterpretationofScripture,beingthemostmoderate,servedmosteffectuallyasenteringwedgesintotheoldtradition。
Atfirstnogreatattentionwaspaidtothebook,theonlynoticebeingtheusualattemptsinsundryclericalnewspaperstopooh-poohit。ButinOctober,1860,appearedintheWestminsterReviewanarticleexultingintheworkasanevidencethatthenewcriticalmethodhadatlastpenetratedtheChurchofEngland。
TheopportunityfordefendingtheChurchwasatonceseizedbynolessapersonagethanBishopWilberforce,ofOxford,thesamewhoafewmonthsbeforehadsecuredafamemorelastingthanenviablebyhisattacksonDarwinandtheevolutionarytheory。Hisfirstonslaughtwasmadeinachargetohisclergy。ThishefollowedupwithanarticleintheQuarterlyReview,veryexplosiveinitsrhetoric,muchlikethatwhichhehaddevotedinthesameperiodicaltoDarwin。Thebishopdeclaredthattheworktended“towardinfidelity,ifnottoatheism“;thatthewritershadbeen“guiltyofcriminallevity“;that,withtheexceptionoftheessaybyDr。Temple,theirwritingswere“fullofsophistriesandscepticisms。”HewasespeciallybitteragainstProf。Jowett’sdictum,“InterprettheScripturelikeanyotherbook“;heinsistedthatMr。Goodwin’streatmentoftheMosaicaccountoftheoriginofman“sweepsawaythewholebasisofinspirationandleavesnoplacefortheIncarnation“;andthroughthearticlewerescatteredsuchrhetoricaladornmentsasthewords“infidel。”
“atheistic。”“false。”and“wanton。”Itatonceattractedwideattention,butitsmostimmediateeffectwastomakethefortuneofEssaysandReviews,whichwasstraightwaydemandedoneveryhand,wentthrougheditionafteredition,andbecameapowerintheland。Atthisapanicbegan,andwiththeusualresultsofpanic——muchfollyandsomecruelty。Addressesfromclergyandlaity,manyofthemfranticwithrageandfear,pouredinuponthebishops,beggingthemtosaveChristianityandtheChurch:astormofabusearose:thesevenessayistswerestigmatizedas“thesevenextinguishersofthesevenlampsoftheApocalypse。”