《哲学史-philosophy of history(英文版)》philosophy of history(英文版)-第4章

by　their　countrymen；　and　which　formed　their　own　character；　they　record　their　views　of　their
political　relations；　and　of　their　moral　and　spiritual　nature；　and　the　principle　of　their　designs　and
conduct。　What　the　historian　puts　into　their　mouths　is　no　supposititious　system　of　ideas；　but　an
uncorrupted　transcript　of　their　intellectual　and　moral　habitudes。　
§　4
Of　these　historians；　whom　we　must　make　thoroughly　our　own；　with　whom　we　must　linger　long；　if
we　would　live　with　their　respective　nations；　and　enter　deeply　into　their　spirit：　of　these　historians；　to
whose　pages　we　may　turn　not　for　the　purpose　of　erudition　merely；　but　with　a　view　to　deep　and
genuine　enjoyment；　there　are　fewer　than　might　be　imagined。　Herodotus　the　Father；　i。e。　the
Founder　of　History　and　Thucydides　have　been　already　mentioned。　Xenophon"s　Retreat　of　the
Ten　Thousand　is　a　work　equally　original。　Caesar"s　mentaries　are　the　simple　masterpiece　of
a　mighty　spirit。　Among　the　ancients；　these　annalists　were　necessarily　great　captains　and　statesmen。
In　the　Middle　Ages；　if　we　except　the　Bishops；　who　were　placed　in　the　very　centre　of　the　political
world；　the　Monks　monopolise　this　category　as　naive　chroniclers　who　were　as　decidedly　isolated
from　active　life　as　those　elder　annalists　had　been　connected　with　it。　In　modern　times　the　relations
are　entirely　altered。　Our　culture　is　essentially　prehensive　and　immediately　changes　all　events
into　historical　representations。　Belonging　to　the　class　in　question；　we　have　vivid；　simple；　clear
narrations　—　especially　of　military　transactions　—　which　might　fairly　take　their　place　with　those　of
Caesar。　In　richness　of　matter　and　fullness　of　detail　as　regards　strategic　appliances；　and　attendant
circumstances；　they　are　even　more　instructive。　The　French　〃Memoires〃　also　fall　under　this
category。　In　many　cases　these　are　written　by　men　of　mark；　though　relating　to　affairs　of　little　note。
They　not　unfrequently　contain　a　large　proportion　of　anecdotal　matter；　so　that　the　ground　they
occupy　is　narrow　and　trivial。　Yet　they　are　often　veritable　masterpieces　in　history；　as　those　of
Cardinal　Retz；　which　in　fact　trench　on　a　larger　historical　field。　In　Germany　such　masters　are　rare。
Frederick　the　Great　（Histoire　de　mon　temps）　is　an　illustrious　exception。　Writers　of　this　order
must　occupy　an　elevated　position。　Only　from　such　a　position　is　it　possible　to　take　an　extensive
view　of　affairs　—　to　see　everything。　This　is　out　of　the　question　for　him；　who　from　below　merely
gets　a　glimpse　of　the　great　world　through　a　miserable　cranny。　
II。　Reflective　History
1。　Universal　History　…　2。　Pragmatical　History　…　3。　Critical　History　
§　5
The　second　kind　of　history　we　may　call　the　reflective。　It　is　history　whose　mode　of　representation
is　not　really　confined　by　the　limits　of　the　time　to　which　it　relates；　but　whose　spirit　transcends　the
present。　In　this　second　order　strongly　marked　variety　of　species　may　be　distinguished。　
1。　Universal　History
§　6
It　is　the　aim　of　the　investigator　to　gain　a　view　of　the　entire　history　of　a　people　or　a　country；　or　of
the　world；　in　short；　what　we　call　Universal　History。　In　this　case　the　working　up　of　the　historical
material　is　the　main　point。　The　workman　approaches　his　task　with　his　own　spirit；　a　spirit　distinct
from　that　of　the　element　he　is　to　manipulate。　Here　a　very　important　consideration　will　be　the
principles　to　which　the　author　refers；　the　bearing　and　motives　of　the　actions　and　events　which　he
describes；　and　those　which　determine　the　form　of　his　narrative。　Among　us　Germans　this　reflective
treatment　and　the　display　of　ingenuity　which　it　occasions；　assume　a　manifold　variety　of　phases。
Every　writer　of　history　proposes　to　himself　an　original　method。　The　English　and　French　confess　to
general　principles　of　historical　position。　Their　standpoint　is　more　that　of　cosmopolitan　or　of
national　culture。　Among　us　each　labours　to　invent　a　purely　individual　point　of　view。　Instead　of
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。