STYLE AND POETICAL SPIRIT OF MICHELET.

249

and episodes that have apparently little or nothing to do with the main subject; such, for instance, is his digression on Petrarch and Laura. There are also reflections and remarks in deplorably bad taste, which seem actually thrown in on purpose to soil the limpidity of the historical stream. Here is a singular example in point: "Wool and flesh are the primitive foundations of England and the English race. Ere becoming the world's manufactory of hardware and tissues, England was a victualling shop. From time immemorial they were a breeding and pastoral people—a race fatted on beef and mutton. Hence that freshness of tint, that beauty and strength. Their greatest man, Shakspeare, was originally a butcher."

Let us in candor forgive the historian such puerile and preposterous ideas. We ourselves have heard him acknowledge, from his chair in the Collège de France, that he was but slightly acquainted with England as it exists in the nineteenth century. Such blemishes may mar particular passages, but they cannot prevent the History of France, as executed by M. Michelet, from appearing in the light of a drama guided apparently by Providence to its closing scene, and wherein its distinctive phases are marked with indelible colors. A regular methodic history of France is not what will be found in the work: it is more like a cluster of gems thrown negligently in wreaths, with the capriciousness of lofty impulses; indeed, it cannot be appreciated without much previous knowledge of the history itself. The glory of the historian consists in unfolding the Divine superintendence in the vast chain of operations, which is revealed only to a few gifted spectators: such is the principal glory of M. Michelet, though the generality of readers are chiefly captivated by the brilliancy of his style, and by the warmth and fervor of his imagination, which occasionally tends to mislead him. He frequently accumulates in one page so many facts, ideas, parallels, and brilliant phrases, that the reader is completely dazzled. This manner of composing history is doubtless less calculated to convey instruction than that of the Greek and Roman historians, or of M. Guizot, who never aims at any poetical form of language. But the nature of M. Michelet's soul can never change; he is perhaps a great poet astray from his natural and primitive path; but whatever ought to have been his pursuit, there can be no question that he is the greatest historical poet, the most poetic historian, of the nineteenth century.

There is a delicate and hallowed ground for historical investigation, which has of late years been the subject of two eminent

works, full of profound researches. The first is in French, and entitled Jesus Christ et sa Doctrine, by M. Salvador, author of the Institutions de Moïse; the other is in German, the Life of Jesus, by Dr. Strauss, of which M. Littre of the Institute has given an excellent French translation. M. Salvador's work relates the life of Jesus Christ and of the most celebrated apostles, and then proceeds to a grave and conscientious examination of the Christian doctrine, of its connections with the philosophical and religious theories already known at the commencement of the reign of Augustus, and of the metamorphoses it has undergone from its very cradle. When he takes Christianity in a philosophical point of view, he refutes and denies the Catholic tenet, which affirms that the doctrine of Jesus Christ, taken not only in any of its conditions but in its whole, is the absolute truth now disseminated in the world through priesthood; and also that it is applicable to all situations of man and all states of society. And afterwards, when he considers Christianity in a religious point of view, his investigations lead him to conclude, that Jesus Christ was not the son of Abraham, through whom all the nations of the earth were to be blessed, and that the whole Jewish prediction has not been accomplished in him. M. Salvador afterwards contends, contrary to the opinion of the whole Christian Church, that it is materially false to pronounce the determining cause of the death of Jesus Christ to have been the result of a personal system of persecution and hatred; according to his view, it was the evident result of the difficulties and exigencies arising naturally from the situation in which the supreme council of Judea was then placed; and therefore, a similar violent condemnation could not have taken place in any other Sanhedrim. But, with reference to the exclusive character of the Messiah, attributed to the person of Jesus Christ, he maintains, that as the plans of the Creator of the Universe are much more profound than the designs of man, all the events (of the era of Jesus) have had at least one consequence, that of disposing the world to the adoration of one identical God, and of spreading among innumerable nations the foundation of the law, and thus preparing the way for the future Mediator of true Christianity. The tenor of the work can easily be understood from these few words on the subject. As to Dr. Strauss, his book is a mass of documents and reasonings in support of scepticism. It is a very learned production, but from the little we have seen of it, it seems to be too full of the deistical arguments and conclusions of the philosophers of the eighteenth century. M. Salvador, on the contrary,

RELIGIOUS INVESTIGATION.

251

is more original in his investigations, and is often deeply interesting in his discourses; and his sincerity in the research of truth is always manifest. The German doctor aspires apparently to the caustic dryness of a sceptic philosopher. The characteristic of the latter, in truth, is scepticism, whilst in the former there reigns deep conviction. M. Salvador's book created a great sensation in the learned world; it has been commented upon by members of all sects, but with the expressions of esteem due to his probity, independence of opinion, and exemplary candor in acknowledging the sincerity and grandeur of the convictions of others. How desirable that this spirit of toleration were more generally exhibited in discussions on religious subjects!

Descriptive School of Historians.-M. de Barante-his History of the Dukes of Burgundy-Object and Character of the Work-Beauty of its Descriptions-its principal Features.-M. Daru―his History of Venice-Grandeur of the Subject -Character of the Work.-Account of the Venetian Constitution.-M. Daru's History of Brittany.-Versatility of M. Daru's Genius-Cuvier's Eloge.-M. Capefigue-his History of Philip Augustus-his other numerous Works.-General Tendency of M. Capefigue's Works-Novelty of his Historical Researches-his Style-Rashness of his Judgments.-M. Mazure's History of the Revolution of England in 1688.-Armand Carrel-his History of the Counter-Revolution in England.-Character and Merits of the Work.-M. Fauriel-his History of Southern Gaul-its Merits and Erudition.-Count Philippe de Segur's Historical Works. Various Historical Works by M. Vitet, Count de Saint-Aulaire.-Laurentie.-Bazin.-Lavallée.-Henri Martin-Michaud's History of the Crusades -that of Wilken and of Mr. Mills.-M. de Salvandy's History of Poland.-M. Delécluze's History of Florence.-M. Rossew St. Hilaire's History of Spain.M. Matter's Works.-M. de Beaumont-his "Ireland, Social and Political ❞— Object and Superior Merits of the Work.-Military Historical Works-General Foy-General Jomini-Marshal Suchet-General Mathieu Dumas-General Pelet. Memoirs-Mass of worthless Compositions under that Title.-M. de Stael's Considérations sur la Revolution-Memoirs of the Duke of Saint-Simon.-Biography-M. de Walkenaer's Lives of Lafontaine and Horace.-M. Tasherau's Lives of Molière and Corneille.-M. Quatremère de Quincy's Lives of Raphael, Michael Angelo, and Canova.-Biographie Universelle -General View and Paramount Importance of History.

WE have already intimated that the classification of historians into various sections and schools was opposed to our own ideas; but we find the method generally adopted, though without any substantial reason; for, as we have seen it observed by M. Augustin Thierry, there is no school, since neither master nor scholars are to be found. In fact, no two historians are alike; each has his peculiar system, views, and manner; and it is only in certain outlines, in a few points, that a similarity can be traced, sufficient to warrant such arbitrary approximation. At the same time, the character of M. de Barante's great work, the History of the Dukes of Burgundy, is so prominently marked, as fully to justify the distinction it has received of descriptive history. The celebrated History of Switzerland, by John Müller,

is, however, entitled, we think, to be adduced as the first great model of this descriptive method in modern times. But the difficulty consists in marshalling under M. de Barante's standard any worthy and strict followers of his system; except M. Daru, the historian of Venice, we know of none, who, by his merits and essentially descriptive character, can be assimilated or ranked with the historian of the Dukes of Burgundy. M. Capefigue certainly partakes of the descriptive in his reproduction of old chronicles, which he arranges, dissects, and recasts in brilliant phraseology and imagery; but he has always a political object in view, and is deeply imbued with prejudices: no historian, in truth, can be more remote from the simple, elegant, and impartial manner of M. de Barante than M. Capefigue. We will therefore speak of M. de Barante and M. Daru as the only eminent writers of the descriptive school, abjuring all affected classification with regard to the remaining authors who will claim attention.

66

We have previously stated that M. de Barante's motto was, Scribere ad narrandum non ad probandum. “I have introduced no reflection," he says, no judgment, on the events which I relate... the judgment and reflections of the contemporaries were the things needful." Accordingly, he avoids the practice, adopted by the philosophic historians, of systematizing and generalizing—of tracing the operation of general causes. Far from filling his pages with discussions on doubtful or disputed points, he complains that the historians of his country have not rendered their compilations sufficiently attractive, although the contemporary materials which they have followed carry with them a charm of which all readers are sensible: in these documents the national character is fully personified. The writers convey, with their peculiarly shrewd and felicitous naïvété, in the very manner of their narration, a sense of the feeling which actuates them, as they record events which they themselves had witnessed. The whole of the French literature, observes M. de Barante, from the fabliaux and chronicles, down to Lafontaine and Hamilton, is marked with this stamp; it is always a narrative endeavoring to present a dramatic picture to the imagination, delighting in life and movement; leaving the reader to form his own inferences, approve or condemn at will, and uniting a sort of gentle irony with a spirit of impartial benevolence. He observes, also, that the French, although so rich in such excellent materials, have hitherto failed to make a right use of them; then, censuring those who would render history mainly