哲学史-philosophy of history(英文版)-第3章

按键盘上方向键 ← 或 → 可快速上下翻页，按键盘上的 Enter 键可回到本书目录页，按键盘上方向键 ↑ 可回到本页顶部！
————未阅读完？加入书签已便下次继续阅读！


writing　history；　we　are　always　beating　our　brains　to　discover　how　history　ought　to　be　written。　This
first　kind　of　Reflective　History　is　most　nearly　akin　to　the　preceding；　when　it　has　no　farther　aim　than
to　present　the　annals　of　a　country　plete。　Such　pilations　（among　which　may　be　reckoned
the　works　of　Livy；　Diodorus　Siculus；　Johannes　von　Müller's　History　of　Switzerland）　are；　if　well
performed；　highly　meritorious。　Among　the　best　of　the　kind　may　be　reckoned　such　annalist　as
approach　those　of　the　first　class；　who　give　so　vivid　a　transcript　of　events　that　the　reader　may　well
fancy　himself　listening　to　contemporaries　and　eye…witnesses。　But　it　often　happens　that　the
individuality　of　tone　which　must　characterise　a　writer　belonging　to　a　different　culture；　is　not
modified　in　accordance　with　the　periods　such　a　record　must　traverse。　The　spirit　of　the　writer　is
quite　other　than　that　of　the　times　of　which　he　treats。　Thus　Livy　puts　into　the　mouths　of　the　old
Roman　kings；　consuls；　and　generals；　such　orations　as　would　be　delivered　by　an　acplished
advocate　of　the　Livian　era；　and　which　strikingly　contrast　with　the　genuine　traditions　of　Roman
antiquity　（e。g。　the　fable　of　Menenius　Agrippa）。　In　the　same　way　he　gives　us　descriptions　of　battles；
as　if　he　bad　been　an　actual　spectator；　but　whose　features　would　serve　well　enough　for　battles　in
any　period；　and　whose　distinctness　contrasts　on　the　other　hand　with　the　want　of　connection　and
the　inconsistency　that　prevail　elsewhere；　even　in　his　treatment　of　chief　points　of　interest。　The
difference　between　such　a　piler　and　an　original　historian　may　be　best　seen　by　paring
Polybius　himself　with　the　style　in　which　Livy　uses；　expands；　and　abridges　his　annals　in　those
period；　of　which　Polybius's　account　has　been　preserved。　Johann　von　Müller　has　given　a　stiff；
formal；　pedantic　aspect　of　history；　in　the　endeavour　to　remain　faithful　in　his　portraiture　to　the　times
he　describes。　We　much　prefer　the　narratives　we　find　in　old　Tschudy。　All　is　more　naive　and　natural
than　it　appears　in　the　garb　of　a　fictitious　and　affected　archaism。　

　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　§　7

A　history　which　aspires　to　traverse　long　periods　of　time；　or　to　be　universal；　must　indeed　forego　the
attempt　to　give　individual　representations　of　the　past　as　it　actually　existed。　It　must　foreshorten　its
pictures　by　abstractions；　and　this　includes　not　merely　the　omission　of　events　and　deeds；　but
whatever　is　involved　in　the　fact　that　Thought　is；　after　all；　the　most　trenchant　epitomist。　A　battle；　a
great　victory；　a　siege；　no　longer　maintains　its　original　proportions；　but　is　put　off　with　a　bare
mention。　When　Livy　e。g。　tells　us　of　the　wars　with　the　Volsci；　we　sometimes　have　the　brief
announcement：　“This　year　war　was　carried　on　with　the　Volsci。”　

　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　2。　Pragmatical　History

　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　§　8

A　second　species　of　Reflective　History　is　what　we　may　call　the　Pragmatical。　When　we　have　to
deal　with　the　Past；　and　occupy　ourselves　with　a　remote　world　a　Present　rises　into　being　for　the
mind　…　produced　by　its　own　activity；　as　the　reward　of　its　labour。　The　occurrences　are；　indeed；
various；　but　the　idea　which　pervades　them　…　their　deeper　import　and　connection　…　is　one。　This
takes　the　occurrence　out　of　the　category　of　the　Past　and　makes　it　virtually　Present。　Pragmatical
（didactic）　reflections；　though　in　their　nature　decidedly　abstract；　are　truly　and　indefeasibly　of　the
Present；　and　quicken　the　annals　of　the　dead　Past　with　the　life　of　today。　Whether；　indeed　such
reflections　are　truly　interesting　and　enlivening；　depends　on　the　writer's　own　spirit。　Moral　reflections
must　here　be　specially　noticed；　…　the　moral　teaching　expected　from　history；　which　latter　has　not
unfrequently　been　treated　with　a　direct　view　to　the　former。　It　may　be　allowed　that　examples　of
virtue　elevate　the　soul；　and　are　applicable　in　the　moral　instructions　of　children　for　impressing
excellence　upon　their　minds。　But　the　destinies　of　peoples　and　states；　their　interests；　relations；　and
the　plicated　issue　of　their　affairs；　present　quite　another　field。　Rulers；　Statesmen；　Nations；　are
wont　to　be　emphatically　mended　to　the　teaching　which　experience　offers　in　history。　But　what
experience　and　history　teach　is　this；　…　that　peoples　and　governments　never　have　learned　anything
from　history；　or　acted　on　principles　deduced　from　it。　Each　period　is　involved　in　such　peculiar
circumstances；　exhibits　a　condition　of　things　so　strictly　idiosyncratic；　that　its　conduct　must　be
regulated　by　considerations　connected　with　itself；　and　itself　alone。　Amid　the　pressure　of　great
events；　a　general　principle　gives　no　help。　It　is　useless　to　revert　to　similar　circumstances　in　the　Past。
The　pallid　shades　of　memory　struggle　in　vain　with　the　life　and　freedom　of　the　Present。　Looked　at　in
this　light；　nothing　can　be　shallower　than　the　oft…repeated　appeal　to　Greek　and　Roman　examples
during　the　French　Revolution。　Nothing　is　more　diverse　than　the　genius　of　those　nations　and　that　of
our　times。　Johannes　v。　Müller；　in　his　Universal　History　as　also　in　his　History　of　Switzerland；　had
such　moral　aims　in　view。　He　designed　to　prepare　a　body　of　political　doctrines　for　the　instruction　of
princes；　governments　and　peoples　（he　formed　a　special　collection　of　doctrines　and　reflections；　…
frequently　giving　us　in　his　correspondence　the　exact　number　of　apophthegms　which　he　had
piled　in　a　week）；　but　he　cannot　reckon　this　part　of　his　labour　as　among　the　best　that　he
acplished。　It　is　only　a　thorough；　liberal；　prehensive　view　of　historical　relations　（such　e。g。　as
we　find　in　Montesquieu's　Esprit　des　Loix）；　that　can　give　truth　and　interest　to　reflections　of　this
order。　One　Reflective　History　therefore　supersedes　another。　The　materials　are　patent　to　every
writer：　each　is　likely　enough　to　believe　himself　capable　of　arranging　and　manipulating　them；　and　we
may　expect　that　each　will　insist　upon　his　own　spirit　as　that　of　the　age　in　question。　Disgusted　by
such　reflective　histories　readers　have　often　returned　to　a　with　pleasure　to　a　narrative　adopting　no
particular　point　of　view。　These　certainly　have　their　value；　but　for　the　most　part　they　offer　only
material　for　history。　We　Germans　are　not　content　with　such。　The　French；　on　the　other　hand；
display　great　genius　in　reanimating　bygone　times；　and　in　bringing　the　past　to　bear　upon　the　present
conditions　of　things。　

　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　3。　Critical　History

　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　§　9

The　third　form　of　Reflective　History　is　the　Critical。　This　deserves　mention　as　pre…eminently　the
mode　of　treating　history；　now　current　in　Germany。　It　is　not　history　itself　that　is　here　presented。　We
might　more　properly　designate　it　as　a　History　of　History；　a　criticism　of　historical　narratives　and　an
investigation　of　their　truth　and　credibility。　Its　peculiarity　in　point　of　fact　and　of　intention；　consists　in
the　acuteness　with　which　the　writer　extorts　something　from　the　records　which　was　not　in　the
matters　recorded。　The　French　have　given　as　much　that　is　profound　and　judicious　in　this　class　of
position。　But　they　have　not　endeavoured　to　pass　a　merely　critical　procedure　for　substantial
history。　They　have　duly　presented　their　judgments　in　the　form　of　critical　treatises。　Among　us；　the
so…called　“higher　criticism；”　which　reigns　supreme　in　the　domain　of　philology；　has　also　taken
possession　of　our　historical　literature。　This　“higher　criticism”　has　been　the　pretext　for　introducing
all　the　anti…historical　monstrosities　that　a　vain　imagination　could　suggest。　Here　we　have　the　other
method　of　making　the　past　a　living　reality；　putting　subjective　fancies　in　the　place　of　historical　data；
fancies　whose　merit　is　measured　by　their　boldness；　that　is；　the　scantiness　of　the　particulars　on
which　they　are　based；　and　the　peremptoriness　with　which　they　contravene　the　best　established
facts　of　history。　

　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　§　10

4。　The　last　species　of　Reflective　History　announces　its　fragmentary　character　on　the　very　face　of　it。
It　adopts　an　abstract　position；　yet；　since　it　takes　general　points　of　view　（e。g。　as　the　History　of　Art；
of　Law；　of　Religion）；　it　forms　a　transition　to　the　Philosophical　History　of　the　World。　In　our　time　this
form　of　the　history　of　ideas　has　been　more　developed　and　brought　into　notice。　Such　branches　of
national　life　stand　in　close　relation　to　the　entire　plex　of　a　people's　annals；　and　the　question　of
chief　importance　in　relation　to　our　subject　is；　whether　the　connection　of　the　whole　is　exhibited　in　its
truth　and　reality；　or　referred　to　merely　external　relations。　In　the　latter　case；　these　important
phenomena　（Art。；　Law；　Religion；　&c。）　appear　as　purely　accidental　national　peculiarities。　It　must　be
remarked　that；　when　Reflective　History　has　advanced　to　the　adoption　of　general　points　of　view；　if
the　position　taken　is　a　true　one；　these　are　found　to　constitute　…　not　merely　external　thread；　a
superficial　series　…　but　are　the　inward　guiding　soul　of　the　occurrences　and　actions　that　occupy　a
nation's　annals。　For；　like　the　soul…conductor　Mercury；　the　Idea　is　in　truth；　the　leader　of　peoples
and　of　the　World；　and　Spirit；　the　rational　and　necessitated　will　of　that　conductor；　is　and　has　been
the　director　of　the　events　of　the　World's　History。　To　bee　acquainted　with　Spirit　in　this　its　office
of　guidance；　is　the　object　of　our　present　undertaking。　This　brings　us　to　。。。

Philosophic　History




III。　Philosophic　History

　　　　　　　　i。　Reason　Governs　the　World　…　ii。　The　Destiny　of　Reason　…　iii。　World　History　



　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　§　11

The　third　kind　of　history；　—　the　Philosophical。　No　explanation　was　needed　of　the　two　previous
classes；　their　nature　was　self…evident。　It　is　otherwise　with　this　last；　which　certainly　seems　to　require
an　exposition　or　justification。　The　most　general　definition　that　can　be　given；　is；　that　the　Philosophy
of　History　means　nothing　but　the　thoughtful　consideration　of　it。　Thought　is；　indeed。；　essential　to
humanity。　It　is　this　that　distinguishes　us　from　the　brutes。　In　sensations　cognition　and　intellection；　in
our　instincts　and　volitions；　as　far　as　they　are　truly　human　Thought　is　an　invariable　element。　To　insist
upon　Thought　in　this　connection　with　history；　may；　however；　appear　unsatisfactory。　In　this　science
it　would　seem　as　if　Thought　must　be　subordinate　to　what　is　given　to　the　realities　of　fact；　that　this　is
its　basis　and　guide：　while　Philosophy　dwells　in　the　region　of　self…produced　ideas；　without　reference
to　actuality。　Approaching　history　thus　prepossessed；　Speculation　might　be　expected　to　treat　it　as　a
mere　passive　material；　and；　so　far　from　leaving　it　in　its　native　truth；　to　force　it　into　conformity　with　a
tyrannous　idea；　and　to　construe　it；　as　the　phrase　is；　“à　priori。”　But　as　it　is　the　business　of　history
simply　to　adopt　into　its　records　what　is　and　has　been；　actual　occurrences　and　transactions；　and
since　it　remains　true　to　its　character　in　proportion　as　it　strictly　adheres　to　its　data；　we　seem　to　have
in　Philosophy；　a　process　diametrically　opposed　to　that　of　the　historiographer。　This　contradiction；
and　the　charge　consequent　brought　against　speculation；　shall　be　explained　and　confuted。　We　do
not；　however；　propose　to　correct