ALISON'S HISTORY OF EUROPE.
THIS is the best history of the French Revolution, in English : we should, however, be very sorry if a better were not in the womb of our literature. Mr. ALisoN's history is the best, for it is written with the aid of every modern French author : the best use is not made of these aids, but far better than by any previous English writer. Mr. ALISON is not master of the works he has resorted to, but be has made abundant use of them ; and though sometimes his borrowed views and such as he is morelamiliar with are not a little inconsis- tent, still there are supplied excellent materials for a reader desi- rous of mastering the subject. But such persons must not take Mr. ALISON as an infallible guide. He is sometimes a Tory, sometimes a Doctrinaire, and now and then a philosophical Libe- ral. This last is, however, a rare form, and he seems not a little afraid to loiter in it.
In a philosophical history, one sentence may be •as good as a vo- lume by way of test : here is one— "No institutions in modern times can remain stationary, excepting in countries such as the Eastern dynasties, which, by crushing every effort of industry, pre- vent the possibility of individual elevation : if the lower orders are permitted to better their condition, their expansive force must, in the end, affect the govern- ment." Vol. I. p. 64. Now, no truly philosophical historian could write this sentence. What would M. GuizoT, for instance, from whose writings the author has adopted a good. deal, say to so much inconsistent error ?—for, though erroneous enough, the Doctrinaires take care that their errors shall hang together. There is plenty, however, in this one sentence, by which to try Mr. ALISON'S qualifications for writing the history of the most significant and critical event of history. It lays open the confusion and shallowness of the author's ideas on the grand and pervading principles of political society. "No institutions in modern times can remain stationary."
Why may not institutions remain stationary in modern as well as in ancient times? As long as institutions are adapted to the wants of a people, they remain stationary. The people's wants were as liable to change formerly as at present. There are periods at which institutions are more constant than at others,—for this rea- son, that being well combined in themselves, and in harmony with such public opinion as exists, they keep the wants of men pretty much at the same point. The feudal system was one of these combinations. It lasted for ages : but it implied a grand ar- bitrary division of races, the existence of privileged classes, and the ignorance and servitude of the bulk of the population. When these things changed, the institutions were necessarily mo- dified : there has been a series of modifications, till the thing mo- dified has almost ceased to exist ; and such as it is left, it is ill adapted to the circumstances of the communities in their present state. The putting the charge of changefulness, in this vague way, upon "modern times," proves that the nature of the charge was not understood by the author, and that he is but very imper- fectly aware of what there is in modern times which distinguishes them from any other times.
" Excepting in countries, such as the Eastern dynasties, which by crushing every effort of industry, prevent the possibility of individual elevation."
We say nothing of the slovenly construction of this member of the sentence, but proceed to consider its meaning. "Eastern dynasties" is a very loose• term : but let it pass. The genius of despotism characterizes the East in general ; where the possibility of individual elevation is so far from being prevented, that it is the rule of this form of government. Individual exaltation is prover- bial : the porter of to-day may be the vizier of to-morrow, and he who now cobbles the despot's slippers may in a few hours com- mand his armies. Feudal privileges do not exist: men are classed according to the presiding will, and elevated or depressed accord- ing to its caprice.
" By crushing every effort of industry, prevent the possibility of individual elevation."
Here is no relationship between cause and effect. Eastern dynasties may crush industry ; but the effect of the extinction of industry, is the idleness and poverty of the people, and the dis- couragement if not impOssibility of accumulation. It has no rela- tion to " individual elevation ;" which may go on among the idlest and least ingenious people in the world, and be at a stand-still among the richest and most industrious.
" If the lower orders arc permitted to better their condition, their expansive force must, in the end, affect the government."
If the lower orders are permitted to better their condition, why, then, the condition of the lower orders is changed for the better : what expansive force is this that they have ? and how does the im- provement of the people under a government affect the govern- ment under which they have improved? There is here a notable confusion of ideas; and in all such cases, fine words and unintel- ligible metaphors are employed to conceal from the writer, as well as the reader, that he does not comprehend himself. Suppose a slave master were to permit his slaves to be well edu- cated, to acquire wealth, and a full knowledge of their rank in the creation,---and after all, were to proceed to flog them as usual,—he would find them not a little refractory . his head clerk might talk to him of their "expansive force ;" but his own reflection would inform him, that the institutions which men will bear in one state are utterly intolerable in another condition. Thus, in Mr. ALisoar's. language, the bettering of the condition of a class, by means of its expansive force, affects the government set over it.
The principle of ancient institutions is force—of the institutions best adapted to general wealth and intelligence, reason. The present age is a critical one : a half-enlightened public opinion is exerting all its power, and is assuming prematurely the place of reason, or wholly enlightened public opinion; while, on the other hand, the relics of the old regime still retain a share of power, more especially the power of forms and names. They have not the force which is the principle of Their existence, but they have all the channels in which it used to flow, and some small dribbling of the ancient stream. It is the inconsistency of these two prin- ciples that causes the shocks and shakes of modern times. The ancient principle, as it gets nearer to its end, falls with accelerated velocity; and the principle of the antagonist kind, as it feels its increased power, assumes a more domineering aspect. This is the secret of the changeableness of institutions in modern times. There have been, however, other crises, in which institutions were just as changeable and unsettled. Such was the supersession of the Latin, or Civil form of society, by Feudal institutions : such, again, was the struggle between the Church and Feudalism,. which ended in a false union.
Mr. ALISON, taking but a very imperfect view of the general principles at work in the social and political history of Europe, is still sufficiently well informed to feel that the old bugbear Tory views of the French Revolution no longer serve to satisfy even the most vulgar inquirer. He therefore comes forward with a very fair knowledge of all the modern writers on the sub- ject, in order to give a version of this important historical period equally suitable to the Conservative views of his party, and which shall not be liable to the sneers and contempt of their opponents. He accepts the doctrine of those who detect an onward movement in society he does not pretend that this is not in the direction of improvement, but then, he shows that there is a danger in its going too fast—of the stream being converted into a cataract, as he prettily terms it. The old school insisted that things should remain as they were, and all would be right (for them) : the new school, under the old master, allows that things are changing, and must change ; but then, they must change so slowly that nobody will be aware of any change at all. The sym- pathies of all such writers, it is clear, are with the few : the mass may pine, suffer wrong, inwardly perish, provided they make no disturbance: they must not, however, be righted at the expense of any mischief to the privileged orders that have so long farmed their best exertions. This is the doctrine of vested interests : its spread is universal, from the Law-harpy to the Black-man proprie- tor. Such men as Lord ELLENBOROUGH, with their atrocious sine- cures, must not even have their delicacy hurt; but thousands like WILLIAM STUBBS or JONATHAN GROVE may work their strength away in vain efforts to earn subsistence, ultimately be driven to• parish relief, and be doomed to procreate small prostitutes and ju- venile thieves,—and there is no harm done. When will historians learn to feel that their business is with the interests of the mass; and that, until they arrive at the great duty of generalizing instead of individualizing their sympathies, they may write very pretty novels, but no true or useful histories?
The two volumes of this work already published, carry on the history to the rise of NAPOLEON, and consequently only embrace the two first divisions of the author's plan. The third and fourth periods into which Mr. ALISON has divided the history of Europe since the Revolution of France, end with the battle of Waterloo, and comprise the whole story of NAPOLEON. They are to be treated of in the volumes which fellow. We wish the author suc- cess ; for although our opinions of the value of the events, and also of their true course, do not altogether coincide with Mr. ALI- SON'S, we cannot fail to admire the industry and accuracy of his elaborate compilation.
Previous page
