with clever but inadequate theories. They will no longer be allowed to take up history as a whim or a holiday task in an idle moment, or as a mere relaxation from the severer pursuits of science or philosophy. Whatever else these works of the Master of the Rolls may have accomplished, they have made our demands on the historian more rigid and more exacting. Precisely in proportion as they have drawn more general attention to the subject, as they have shown how ample and various are the authentic materials, how many and divergent the lines of investigation, in proportion as they have brought the whole subject within the penetrating glance of a more critical, and it may be said of a more captious age, in the same proportion will the historian find himself under the necessity of satisfying requirements that never entered the imagination of former generations. Such is the necessary consequence whenever fresh materials are brought into the field of any definite region of study, be it theology, philosophy, or history. Men are compelled to consider the relation of the new matter to the old-to institute contrasts, to discover similitudes, to advance their views, to change the customary posture of their minds. This increased activity creates of itself new powers and new intellectual demands. It enforces more concentrated observation, more critical sagacity-not merely because the new is better understood in its connection with the old, but because the old itself grows into bolder relief and clearer forms from its juxtaposition with the new. It is doubtful whether the advancement of science and learning in all directions is not due much more to these causes than to any superior method of inquiry-whether the matter does not in this, as in other cases, determine the method. But, however this may be, we are persuaded that these works must eventually produce a great revolution in history -perhaps in history generally, certainly in the history of

this country-as great as this generation has witnessed in the histories of Greece and Rome. Nor shall we be far wrong in anticipating for historical studies in general a much profounder interest and a more philosophic appreciation than have hitherto fallen to their share. Strange would it be if it were otherwise. The current of events shifts and winds with such amazing and breathless rapidity—the present so eludes our grasp, that the past seems to offer to many the only safe standing-ground for their imaginations and affections. Contentment with the present, and the somewhat contracted sympathy which such contentment brings with it, is certainly not the failing of this century whatever it may have been of the last. Whether in the apprehension of great changes and in the sense of political insecurity are to be found the most powerful incentives to the cultivation of history, as in the great historical era of Rome, and of France within our own remembrance, it is not needful to determine. That such changes have been pre-eminently favourable to it is unquestionable; that at no time has the past been studied with such passionate earnestness, and consequently with such fulness of appreciation, as when it seemed to be drifting furthest from the present, will scarcely be denied. But whatever may be the cause, the appetite for history is a great and increasing one. To its healthy development the Rolls' Publications will contribute not a little, as they have already given to its growth a new and energetic impulse.

E

A SHORT HISTORY OF THE ENGLISH PEOPLE.

THE extraordinary popularity of Mr. Green's Short History' must be regarded as one of the most curious literary phenomena of the day. Within the space of a brief twelvemonth, or a little more, it has reached the unprecedented sale of 32,000 copies, according to the announcement of its publisher. The fact is noticeable. Had Mr. Green suddenly dawned upon the world as a delightful poet or fascinating novelist of the latest stamp, his success could not have been more remarkable. The reading public are not so indulgent to historians in general. A second or third edition moves off languidly enough. The sale of a few thousand copies satisfies the most ambitious expectations of author and publisher. But here is an author comparatively unknown, or known only to a small circle of friends, who distances at once all competitors-not in some new field of inquiry, not in the pathways of scientific discovery, but in the well-trodden arena of English history. Those who have little acquaintance with the subject, and those who are, or at least profess to have been, familiar with it from their childhood, who are fully persuaded that there are no fresh facts to be elicited, and no further discoveries to be made, are equally loud in Mr. Green's praises. Hostile criticism in every quarter is fascinated and disarmed.

The secret of this extraordinary success it is not difficult to divine. Mr. Green's style is eminently readable and 1 From the Quarterly Review for April, 1876; under the following heading:-A Short History of the English People. By J. R. Green M.A. With Maps and Tables. London. 1874.

attractive. A lively imagination, not always under the most rigid control, imparts its own colours to the dry details of history, where a more scrupulous or conscientious writer would have wearied himself, and fatigued his readers, unwilling to venture beyond the arid region of facts. Every one nowadays demands that whatever else history may be it shall be made interesting. It must trench as closely as possible on the borders of fiction. The influence of a great writer amongst us, who has poured such unmeasured contempt on the Dryasdusts of this and a past generation, has created the belief that the unimaginative historian must also be an incompetent historian. So the demand for history-lively, attractive, and sparkling at all hazards—has produced the required supply. The temptation is great, and Mr. Green has not always been able to resist it. It was not in his nature to do so. For him, the animated, the poetical, and the picturesque exercise an irresistible fascination. He has a natural tendency to supply from his own fertile and fervid imagination the dramatic details that are wanting in his cold and colourless originals.

It is true that in this respect he does not stand alone. It is also true that from the days of Lord Macaulay historians have justified themselves by his example in the use of rhetorical exaggeration, on the supposition that in no other way is it possible to represent to the dull and jaded perceptions of modern times the stirring incidents and emotions of the past. Mr. Green may think that he has sufficient warrant for following a precedent sanctioned by such eminent authority. We think otherwise. Not even in histories. written for readers whose judgment and knowledge may be mature enough to prevent them from being misled, and whose skill may be sufficient to distinguish between truth and error, ought the baseless suggestions of the imagination to intrude upon the strict province of fact-of

facts resting on unquestionable evidence. But in histories for the young-if Mr. Green's book be intended for the young -for the inexperienced and uninitiated, who are sure to take upon trust all that their teacher tells them, and are likely to be more impressed by the fictitious than the true, this licence is even less justifiable. Many readers of English history will never go beyond Mr. Green's book. They will place implicit confidence in a writer whose style and whose genius they cannot fail to admire. Their conceptions of social progress, their judgment of past events, of the great personages that have moulded or modified our national destiny, will be determined exclusively by a perusal of Mr. Green's pages. In his case, therefore, strict accuracy is more important than in works which make no pretensions to speak with authority.

That such a caution is by no means unnecessary in this case may be inferred from the careless and indiscriminate applause lavished on the labours of Mr. Green by the journals and periodicals of the day. We will do him the credit to believe that no one is more conscious than himself of his own defects and imperfections. No one knows better than he the vastness of the task he has undertaken, and the impossibility, in the present state of historical literature, of doing justice to all portions of the subject alike. On some it is clear he has bestowed greater care and attention than on others. If in some parts of his work we trace the conscientious study and examination of original authorities, in others he has trusted exclusively to secondary sources, attempting little more than a reproduction, after his own fashion, without exercising much independent judgment, and not always with rigid accuracy, of the opinions and conclusions of his predecessors. What else could he do? Mr. Green, we presume, has not yet attained to the age of

6

Methuselah. He has not the brazen entrails' or iron frame