樂

having delivered us from the tyranny of a system, so favourable to the production of the rankest abuses in the church, and the grossest superstition in the people.-TEMPLE, the zealous negotiator of the triple alliance, and worthy, by his spirit and candour, to be the associate of De Witt in that great business which was transacted between them with the liberal spirit and honourable confidence of private friendship. His writings give the clearest insight into the period and events of which he treats; and his easy, though careless style, and well-bred manner, would come, almost more than any other, under the description of what may be called the genteel, did not his vanity a little break the charm. None, however, except his political writings, are meant to be recommended; his religious opinions being highly exceptionable and absurd. Yet it is but justice to add, that his unambitious temper, his fondness for private life, his enjoyment of its peace, and his taste for its pleasures, render his character interesting and amiable. The manners-painting CLARENDON, the able chancellor, the exemplary minister, the inflexible patriot, who stemmed, almost singly, the torrent of vice, corruption, and venality; and who was not ashamed of being religious in a court which was ashamed of nothing else; whom the cabal hated for his integrity, and the court for

He

* Sir William Temple, born in 1628, and died in 1698. was ambassador in Holland several years, and his memoirs of the affairs in which he was engaged, or of which he was a witness, are highly important.-ED.

Jean de Wit, grand pensionary of Holland. He was murdered, with his brother Cornelius, by the populace, in 1672. -ED.

Edward Hyde, Earl of Clarendon, was born in 1608, and died in exile, at Rouen, in Normandy, in 1674. Besides his noble "History of the Great Rebellion," he wrote some valuable religious treatises, particularly a Practical Illustration of the Psalms.-ED.

his purity; a statesman who might have had statues erected to him in any other period but that in which he lived; would have reformed most other governments but that to which he belonged; and been supported by almost any king but him whom he had the misfortune to serve. Clarendon, the faithful biographer of his own life, the majestic and dignified historian of the grand rebellion; whose periods sometimes want beauty, but never sense, though that sense is often wrapped up in an involution and perplexity which a little obscure it; whose style is weighty and significant, though somewhat retarded by the stateliness of its march, and somewhat encumbered with a redundancy of words-TORCY," whose memories, though they may be thought to bear rather hard on the famous plenipotentiaries with whom he negotiated, and on the haughtiness of the allies who employed them, are written with much good sense, modesty, and temper. They present a striking reverse in the fortune of the imperious disturber of Europe, " fallen from his high estate." He who had been used to give his orders from the banks of the Po, the Danube, and the Tagus, is seen reduced to supplicate for peace, and to exchange the insolence of triumph for the hope of existence. Two Dutch burgomasters, haughtily imposing their own terms on a monarch who had before filled France with admiration, and Europe with alarm. This reverse must impress the mind of the reader, as it does that of the writer, with an affecting sense of that controlling providence, which thus derides the madness of ambition, and the folly of worldly wisdom; that providence which, in maintaining its character of being the abaser of the proud, produces, by means at first sight the most opposite, the accomplishment of its own purposes;

Jean Baptiste Colbert, marquis de Torcy, was born in 1665, and died in 1746. His memoirs of public affairs to the treaty of Utrecht were printed in 3 vols. in 1716-ED.

and renders the unprincipled lust of dominion the instrument of its own humiliation. The difficulties of a negotiator, who has to conclude an inglorious though indispensable treaty, are feelingly described, as well as the too natural, though hard fate of a minister, who is driven to such an unfortunate measure as that of being considered as the instrument of dishonour to his country. His pious recognition of God, as the supreme disposer of events, is worthy of great praise.-The copious and fluent BURNET.* whose diffuse, but interesting History of his Own Times, informs and pleases; though the loose texture of his slovenly narration would not now be tolerated in a newspaper; who saw a great deal, and wishes to have it thought that he saw every thing; whose egotism we forgive, for the sake of his frankness; and whose minuteness, for the sake of his accuracy; who, if ever he exceeds, it is always on the side of liberty and toleration; an excess safe enough when the writer is soundly loyal, and unquestionably pious; and more especially safe when the reader is a prince.-LADY RUSSEL,† worthy of being the daughter of the virtuous Southampton; too fatally connected with the unhappy politics of the times; whose life was a practical illustration of her faith in the Divine support, and of submission to the Divine will; and whose letters, by their sound and sober piety, strong sense, and useful information, eclipse all those of her learned and distinguished correspondents.

* Gilbert Burnet, bishop of Salisbury, was born at Edinburgh, in 1643, and died in 1715.-ED.

Lady Rachel Russel was married first to Lord Vaughan, son of the Earl of Carbery, and next to Lord William Russel, second son of the Earl of Bedford. In 1683 she again became a widow, by the execution of her husband for his concern in the Rye-house plot. She died in 1729, at the advanced age of ninety. Since the publication of this work, another collection of the letters of Lady Russel, from the originals at Woburn, has been printed.—ED.

CHAPTER X.

Reflections on History-Ancient Historians.

Ir, however, the historian be a compatriot, and especially if he be a contemporary, even though he was no actor in the drama, it is difficult for him not to range himself too uniformly on one side or the other. The human mind has a strong natural bias to adopt exclusive attachments. Perhaps man may be defined to be an animal that delights in party. Yet we are inclined to believe that an historian, though he may be partial and interested, yet, if he be keen-sighted and intelligent as to the facts of which he speaks, is, on the whole, a better witness than a more fair and candid, but worse-informed man; because we may more easily calculate the degree of allowance to be made for partiality and prejudice, than we can estimate that which is to be made for defect of information. Of two evils, therefore, we should prefer a prejudiced but well-informed, to a more impartial but less enlightened

narrator.

When materials are fresh, they are more likely to be authentic; but, unfortunately, when it is more easy to obtain, it is often less safe to employ them. When the events are more remote, their authenticity is more difficult to ascertain; and when they are near, the passions which they excite are more apt to warp the truth. Thus, what might be gained in accuracy by nearness of position, is liable to be lost in the partiality which that very position induces. The true point of vision is attained, when the eye and the object are placed at their due distance. The reader who comes to the perusal of the

work, in a more unimpassioned frame than, perhaps, the author wrote, will best collect the characters from the narrative, if fairly given.

Care should be taken not to extol shining characters in the gross, but to point out their weaknesses and errors; nor should the brilliant qualities of

illustrious men be suffered to cast a veil over their vices, or so to fascinate the young reader as to excite admiration of their very faults. Even in perusing sacred history, we should never extenuate, much less justify, the errors of great characters, but make them, at once, a ground for establishing the doctrine of general corruption, and for quickening our own vigilance. The weaknesses of the wiseɛt, and the errors of the best, while they should be regarded with candour, must not be held up to imitation. It has been reasonably conjectured, that many acts of cruelty in Alexander, whose disposition was naturally merciful, were not a little owing to one of his preceptors having been early accustomed to call himself Phoenix, and his pupil Achilles; and thus to have habitually trained him to an imitation even of the vices of this ferocious hero.

A prince must not study history merely to store his memory with amusing narratives or insulated events, but with a view to trace the dependence of one event upon another. An ordinary reader will be satisfied with knowing the exploits of Scipio or Hannibal, and will be sufficiently entertained with the description of the riches or beauty of such renowned cities as Carthage or Rome; but a prince (who is also a politician) studies history in order to observe how ambition, operating on the breasts of two rival states, led to one war after another between these two states. By what steps the ruin of the one, and the triumph of the other, were hastened or delayed; by what indications the final catas