MR. FREEMAN'S OLD ENGLISH HISTORY FOR CHILDREN.*
MR. FREEMAN has here undertaken one of the most difficult tasks that any writer could impose on himself, that of becoming the interpreter to children of the leading ascertained facts of early English history, and the latest results of modern critical research on that subject. Is it possible to tell children in an interesting and intelligible manner the present state of our knowledge in this branch of study, where so much is still doubtful and disputed, and where so much that has been formerly received as true is now generally rejected as false or impossible ? The class of readers whose tastes we have to consult is at ofice the most peculiar and the most critical of all classes. To be able to tell the facts of real history, and to point out the falsehoods of current historical stories, without, on the one hand, falling below the standard of childish intelligence, and so incurring the terrible and fatal charge of " babyism," or, on the other, of deadening all interest by too great and prolonged an appeal to the higher intelligence of childhood, and so exposing the account to the opposite charge of " nasty " and "stupid," seems to require a peculiar gift and almost a special organization in the interpreter. A written exposition is necessarily much more difficult in such a case than oral instruction. Even those who are not best versed in the mysteries of the childish mind, in its incongruous combinations of strength and weakness, may be greatly assisted by a careful observation of the countenance and demeanour of the auditor, and a modification from moment to moment of the style of the narrative according to the manner in which it is seemingly appreciated. But one who uses pen and ink instead of the tongue and the eye, and who writes for a class instead of an individual present child, must run a great risk of failure, however well informed he may be, and however clear may be his general style of writing and exposition for an older public. Mr. Freeman, whose qualifications in respect of acquaintance with his subject and power of clear and condensed exposition are so much above the common, seems to us, neverthe- less, not to have escaped from the difficulties of his peculiar task, and however valuable his book may be to the teacher of children, we cannot say that we think he has produced a satisfactory reading-book for children themselves. He tells us indeed that the contents of his volume were written for and read to his own children, and, we suppose, received by them with an amount of seemingly intelligent satisfaction, which convinced their father that he was doing the right thing in the right way. But we must allow for the peculiar sense of juvenile self-satisfaction which would attach to such an exposition, made expressly for themselves, and read to them by "papa." We could hardly acquit the young persons in question of a tendency to priggish- ness, supposing they actually appeared to relish Mr. Freeman's remarks on the comparative value of the evidence of Simeon of Durham and other early chroniclers, if we did not allow to them the privilege accorded to popular audiences at scientific congresses of edification without comprehension. Mr. Freeman thinks we can teach children to appreciate the comparative value of historical authorities. As far as our own experience of the childish mind will enable us to judge, we should say decidedly the reverse ; and, we must confess, we should be sorry if such were really possible. To attempt to make little pseudo-critics of children seems to us an entire mistake. The authorities they accept—generally papa and mamma—they accept absolutely and Old EngliA History for Children. By Edward A. Freeman, M.A., late Fellow of Trinity College, Oxford. With Maim. London Macmillan and Co 1569.
quite independently of any grounds for so doing, and whatever and whomsoever papa and mamma may say to be trustworthy they accept on their authority ; and you are really only playing at criticism when you profess to call into critical exercise the mind of a child by an ostentatious display of the machinery of your own judgment.
We have no doubt Mr. Freeman's children had implicit con- fidence in papa's judgment and knowledge,—and in this they would be better justified than most children under similar circum- stances,—and that when he set forth at length the grounds of his judgments on disputed points, they cordially accepted his conclu- sions (when they could find out what they were), and appreciated in a vague manner the compliment paid them in the preliminary appeal to their supposed intellectual powers, though perhaps they rather wished papa would get on with the story. Our author says of his little volume, that "its object is to show that clear, accurate, and scientific views of history, or, indeed, of any subject, may be easily given to children from the very first. In truth, the more rigidly accurate and scientific a statement is, the more easy it is for a child to take it in. The difficulty does not lie with the child who has simply to learn, but with the teacher, who often has to unlearn." But the mere use of correct language respecting facts, and the instruction in real facts from the beginning, are a very different thing from the power of estimating and deciding on the accuracy of the processes of critical reasoning by which the true expressions and the true facts have been arrived at. In the one case, the newly ascertained truth may be equally well taught and learnt at once with the old untruth, but the latter appeals to a stage of intelligence which does not belong to childhood, and any affectation of which makes the young scholars mere charlatans. Mr. Freeman himself appears to acknowledge this fact, for notwith- standing his seeming appeal to the reasoning powers of his young readers, he goes out of his way to guard them (surely quite un- necessarily in such a case) against mistaking doubtful stories from true history, by clothing the former in an artificial and to us most offensive garb of language, in imitation of the style of the received version of the Old Testament. We must say we do not recognize either the consistency or the good taste of Mr. Freeman in this travestie of the Old Testament phraseology, which is thus associated by him in the youthful mind with something rather doubtful and unreliable. If Mr. Freeman, after all, distrusted his young critics' powers of discernment, why could not he say to them simply, "What I am going to tell you is a story which has been often told, but which may be, after all, only a story, and may never have happened." The only probable effect of Mr. Freeman's Old Testament imitations, supposing them perfect and the childish mind as fond as it is generally is of Old Testament stories when told in the received version, seems to us to be that the child would recol- lect all the doubtful stories thus told, and forget or ignore the real facts of history, as being told in a less picturesque and interesting manner.
Mr. Freeman tells us that the latter part of the volume will be found to take for granted a larger amount of general knowledge than the former, because his children actuallygrew older while the volume was being written. But what we complain of is the inequality of the standards of intelligence set up in paragraphs in the same part of the book. Thus he says (in page 2), "Perhaps some of you may not very well understand what I mean by different nations and languages, so I will try to explain that a little more fully before I go on any further ;" and then, after this recognition of the lowest standard of childish intelligence, he proceeds to discuss the relations of the Celtic, German, and English languages, and explain what is meant by the Aryan language, in a manner most satisfactory and
interesting to students of all ages above that of childhood, but which certainly would be quite lost on the hypothetical low type
of childish intelligence, for whose special enlightenment it is intended? We have taken this example quite at random ; but instances frequently occur of quite unnecessary intellectual bathos preceded and followed by appeals to what is a rather high standard of intelligence for any schoolboy.
In general, we may say that Mr. Freeman's explanations are much too lengthy and elaborate. In such cases, brevity and direct sim-
plicity of statement are essential, if we would not weary and confuse the mind of the child. 1Ve must be satisfied to leave much for addition and exp insion at a later stage of life, and not try to make our expositions too complete at once, lest we should fail in com- municating any knowledge at all. Mr. Freeman's volume is much too perfrict an epitome of what we know of early English
history, and though, as he tells us, not an abridgment of his larger histoly of the Norman Conquest, it supplies us with the pith and marro h, of that valuable work. It is in this point of view that we consider his present little volume a valuable acquisition to teachers of children. It may fail in the direct instruction of children, but it will do what is quite as much needed, instruct their ill- informed or half-informed instructors, and enable them by a process of judicious selection and oral modification to impart to their pupils a really accurate and satisfactory summary of the beginnings of English history. The book indeed is full of instruction and interest to students of all ages, and he must be a well-informed man indeed who will not rise from its perusal with clearer and more accurate ideas of a too-much-neglected portion of English history.
To such instructors of children we would recommend in their oral expositions the omission altogether of the critical disserta- tions, and also of the fragments of poetry from the Saxon Chroni- cles, at least, in the very literal translation in which Mr. Freeman presents them. It is quite a mistake to suppose that children will understand or relish the peculiarities of the Anglo-Saxon style, and Mr. Freeman has rendered them still more obscure by endeav- ouring in all possible cases to substitute the English, or, as he would call it, the Later English, forms of words as equivalents for the Anglo-Saxon or Old English forms ; for these are seldom really equivalents. This arises from the extent to which he has pushed his theory of the continuity of the English from Hengist to the present day, virtually ignoring the other important elements which have made up the present English nation and language. This same Anylomania leads him to an absurd exaggeration of the his- torical value of the very interesting old chronicle, or rather series of chronicles, called the "Saxon Chronicle." " Our old chroni- cle, then," he rhapsodizes in one place ; "the oldest English his- tory, the book which you should learn to reverence next after your Bibles and Homer, tells us that the first Teutonic kingdom in Britain began in the year 449." Now, certainly as an historical authority for this statement and date the Chronicle is of little value, for the entire untrustworthiness of its early dates and statements is easily demonstrable. Yet Mr. Freeman seems throughout almost blindly to allow it to be his own guide and unquestioned authority, and to inculcate the same faith on his readers, respecting the facts of this most obscure part of our history ; and as far as it is con- cerned he is thoroughly uncritical, though he displays in other cases so much critical acumen.
We have expressed freely our opinion of the work as not suc- ceeding in its primary object, —the direct instruction of children ; but we are desirous to record equally strongly our admiration of the research and ability which it displays, and our sense of its peculiar value as an indirect medium of teaching the history to children. We must not forget to add that the beautiful little maps with which it is furnished will be found to be a great pleasure as well as assistance to teacher and pupil alike.
Previous page
