On this page
-
Text (2)
-
Untitled Article
-
Untitled Article
Note: This text has been automatically extracted via Optical Character Recognition (OCR) software. The text has not been manually corrected and should not be relied on to be an accurate representation of the item.
-
-
Transcript
-
Note: This text has been automatically extracted via Optical Character Recognition (OCR) software. The text has not been manually corrected and should not be relied on to be an accurate representation of the item.
Additionally, when viewing full transcripts, extracted text may not be in the same order as the original document.
Untitled Article
urtf r » AMi £ ^ arivl ^ a& ^^ 'SSSSSSftES ^* YSal ^ SStfifc a little before his own time . On the contrary , it negar Ennius , is clearly enough proved by SurG . C . Lewis to be nothmg more or less than the SaturnianJnetre ^ , j a ; w , biQhT ^ 0 eyiqs wrote ; and . N aevius is the subiect and apparently the sole subject , of the allusion . Thus the external Drb 6 fcollap ^ e 8 , an ^ t h ^ iriternal indications of "Lay s" incorporated in the his * torv of T 4 i& ^ andilii 6 nysnis comeequally to nothing . ; In endeavouring to distraeuish these layi , Niebuhr hovers between two different tests ^ -the test of matter arid the tesfcofibriri . The test of poetical matter is wholly inadmissible Hii ^ uiJt > ort of Jii ** pecial theory . Nobody doubts that the character of the legends & poeticaliibut it does not follow that they ever existed in the metrical form of ballads , any more than the oral mythology of Greece , part of which > wds- £ rst reduced . to writing by prose mythologists . It is essential to 1 ballad ^ thafc ^ th ey should be in verse , and it is essential to the ballad theory that this verse , or the traces of it , should be clearly discerned . JSiebuhr felt this , and therefore , while he really rests the weight of his theory on the poetical character of the : narrative of Livy , he also undertakes to point out one-or two vestiges of actual metre . And the chief of these—the grand instanee ~ -is found , not in the golden reign of Nama , or the battle of the Horatii and Curiatii , or the destruction of Alba * or the history of liucretia or Virginia , but in the dry legal fragment of the law of treason which is incorporated in the story of the trial of Horatius . This Niebuhr breaks up with his pen into short lines , with mysterious accents , and calls it Saturnian verse . Sir G . C . Lewis justly says that at this rate you might find ballads in the Institutes . ThiSrfact is that Niebuhr was attracted to the passage , and induced to choose it for his experiment , on account of its archaic language , and for no better reason . -Besides his Lays , Niebuhr conceives funeral orations to have been preserved in writing at-a very early period , and to have been one of the sources of the early history . He even undertakes to criticise and compare the quality of these orations , and to pronounce that the stories derived from those of the Fabii are of undeniable authenticity , while those of the Valerii are , he regrets to say , less worthy of credit . Not a vestige of these orations exists . Tne earliest oration mentioned as having been preserved in writing , is that of Appius the Blind against peace with Pyrrhus . In later times funeral panegyrics were preserved , and the achievements attributed in them to the ancestors of the deceased , had , by Livy ' s time , coloured history . Neither is there any historical trace of family memoirs preserved by the great houses in the early period of Rome , though there were doubtless inscriptions tinder the ancestral images which constituted a Roman pedigree . To these'inscriptions and pedigrees Livy probably refers- in speaking of the private records'lost in the Gallic conflagration . The dirges , Sir Gi-O . Lewis seems justified in saying , probably did not survive the day of the funeral . - Readers of Niebuhr must be cautioned against his constant insinuation of the existence Of family and other histories prior to the war with Pyrrhus , and against his ambiguous use of the word Annals , which in one sense denoted chronicles , such as those of Fabius Pictor and his successors , but in another sense ( the only sense in which it is applicable to any documents composed before the war with Fyrrhus ) denotes the Annals of the Pontiffs , which were only dry and meagre annual registers . -After disposing of the external testimony , Sir G . C . Lewis proceeds to analyse the internal character of the history , as we have it in Livy and © ionysiiis ; and he finds that it corresponds to the want of external evidence . * The regal period' has all the character of fable . The subsequent period is marked by discrepancy between the authorities , inconsistency , incoherency , arid improbability , not only in its general texture , but even in the accounts of the most leading events , down at least to the period of the Sammite wars . In his chapter on the ancient nations of Italy , Niebuhr has laid down for himself the convenient rule that in an obscure question like the origin and migrations df the ancient Italian races , where there is no trustworthy evidence to be had you may decide without trustworthy evidence ; and that' your decisions will be a valuable addition to history . That is to Ba y * you rimy dispense with the rules of evidence when there is a temptation to dispense with them ; otherwise they may remain in force . Sir G . O . Lewis' lakes a better course , and examining the legends from which Niebuhr has framed his ethnological chart of ancient Italy , finds them a heap of contradictory' and fluctuating fable , from which ho facts of any kindMjan be drawn . He justly repudiates Niebuhr ' s mode of reducing mjW , ' by treating them as ethnological symbols , as being merely * variety of the old mode of rationalising fable , and equally without justification . '' The legend of iEneae , from which Niebuhr deduces a connexion between the Pelasgians of Asia Minor and Italy , Sir G . C Lewis shows to be merely "ttoeof the legends of the Homeric cycle , from which it has been improperly fieparated . It is an evidence of the influence of the Homeric poems in Italy Wwell as Greece , and nothing more . The relics by which it was supposed W'be attested were just like those of Homeric heroes , which were shown in different cities of Greece . The history of Alba , about which and its connexion with Lavinium Niebuhr supposes that he can educe facts , is also a pure'fable , invented to fill the gnp between the flight of iEneas from Troy and the foundation of Rome . The very existence of the city of Alba , as oietiriguished from the"' temples on the Alban Hill , rests on the frail foundation of an oral tradition of 450 years . , '' -We ^ Maaybe mote unwilling to admit that nothing bo krtown about the fbutiaeltibri ' bf'Rome . Such , however , is the fiict . Romulus and Remus ate ^ purelyf mythieal ptiraouagea , and their history is purely mythical , and a sequel toithe' ^ Wy ^ of Alba and iEnoas . And there is no other account more tiredible ^ hi itself ol * supported by better testimony . The origin of the citiy , Widdtf those ,, institutions which , nre attributed to its mythical founder and J ^ equally tyiy ' tmcai successor ,- Numa , are things about which imagination : w «»^ nd ' p ^ dbably ' will , speculatq , but about which history is dunib ^' Hty'pot «* W (^ Wieerhirtg' theinY such as the union of a Latin and a Sabino city , and '• ' •'"• ' ¦¦' ¦ thi . b :,. ' ' . ¦¦ .- ..
the successive formation of the " three patrician I ^^^^^ T ^ pi ^^ a pounded by Niebuhr , are excursions into what Germans call the '' Prehistoric Foretime , " wholly unedifying , except as monuments of learned ingenuity ^ to the inquirer after positive-truth * 7 The legejtds ^ ofthe Kings are made up , for the most part , of fabulous origins ^ of institutions , rites , customs , monuments , arid local names , which all nations are alike prone to invent , stuck together so as to form a continuous narrative , the cement being often very ill concealed . There seems tdbe ' no reason whatever for allowing , with Niebuhr , that the narrative assumes a more historical character with Tullus Hostilius , jphose rejgn i ? jusfe as , obviously made up of aetiological legends as those of his predecessors . The institutions of the King of the Sacrifices and the Interrex , the Vaieriaxi law against aspiring to royal power , and the hatred of the n ame ofKing which was fatal to Caesar , are sufficient proof that the Roman constitution w&s at or iel time a monarchy ; arid the Interrex shows that this monarchy waselective . But as to the names and history of the individual kings , and the political progress of the nation under them , we must be content to remain ignorant . The constitution of Servius . Tullius , the . exact and prosaic form of which contrasts so curiously , with the poetical legends t >^ which it is surrounded , is considered both by Schwegler and Sir G . C , Lewi £ on good grounds to be unauthentic . The treaty with Carthage in the first year of the republic , seen by Polybius , and the cloacap and other great works attributed to the regal period , seem , however , to attest the prosperity at Rome under the kings . ^ : . , . ., The possession of the conquered territories was a substantial record of the progress of Roman conquest before the war with Pyrrhus . The existence of the great political institutions of Rome was in like manner a proof that those institutions had been developed , and , it would be unreasonable to doubt , by conflict between the orders . Particular events , such as the Decemviral legislation , the Gallic conflagration , the Caudine convention , were preserved in authentic monuments , or indelibly written in the national heart . Subsequent to the Gallic conflagration , there were registers of the . annual magistrates , lowever imperfect , and there is some appearance of registration of other events . But all the details even of such events as the Secession of the Plebs , the institution of the Tribunate ; the Decemvirate , and the Gallic war , prove on examination as utterly untrustworthy in their internal texture , as they are destitute of external evidence . Such at leas * is the conviction that Sir G . C . Lewis ' s analysis leaves on our minds . After illustrating his principles by applying them to the early history of Greece , and showing ; that there also internal untrustworthjness coincides with the want of external evidence traceable to contemporary testiinony , ' Sir G . C . Lewis ends by saying : — ' ' , AH the historical labour bestowed upon the early centuries of Rome , will in general be wasted . The history of this period , viewed as a series of picturesque nareativea , will be xead to the greatest advantage in the original writers , and will . be deteriorate ^ by reproduction in a modern dress . If we regard a historical painting merely as a work of art , the accounts of the ancients can only suffer from being' retouched by the pencil of the modern restorer . On the other hand , all attempts to reduce them to a pttrely historical form by conjectural omissions , additions , alterations , and transpositions , must be nugatory . The workers on the historical treadmill may . continue to grind the air , but they wiil never produce any valuable result . . This is a true verdict , and all scholars , and all teachers of Roman history ou"ht to make themselves acquainted with the evidence by which it is supported . If Sir G . C . Lewis had written before Niebuhr / and his blind though able and vigorous follower , Arnold , we should have lost something , but we should have been spared more . We should have lost a gopd deal , pf learning and ingenuity , and some fine moral writing ; we should have been spared the trouble and the intellectual evil of attempting , to follow and learning to credit volumes of unauthorised and dreamy speculation . The true disciples of Niebuhr will , of course , still love to dwell with him in the Pre-historic Foretime ; but less mystical scholars will devote their town attention , and direct the attention of their pupils , to the period of Roman history subsequent to the war with Pyrrhus , according to Sir G . C . Lewis ' s sound * This , in our opinion , is the best of Sir G . C . Lewis ' s books , though'U exhibits his usual heaviness and pointlessness of style . It s"hows throughout wonderful erudition ; and is marked throughout by strong sense , clear reasoning , and independence of mind . We apprehend it will , if not . close , afc least decide the controversy j and we earnestly commend it to the studem ) ( we cannot commend , it to the light reader ) as one from the attentive perusal of which he will derive health and vigour of understanding , as well as the true . view of the question to which it immediately relates .
Untitled Article
GEKMAN MYTHOLOGY AND LEGEND . I . Odin . Von Wolfgang Menzel . London : D . NritjjL II . Bayerische Sagen und Br&uche ( Bavarian Legends and CustomB > Von Fnedriob Panzer , ZweiterBand . London : D . Nut * Whbn Tacitus said of the Germans : " They think it unfitting the majesty of the gods to confine them within walls , pr to represent them under any human form "— " Ceterum nee cohibere parietibus deos , nequo in ullam humani oris speciem assimilaro , ex magnitudine coelestium arbitrantur , —ho probably committed a mistake something like our anthropomorphic interpretations of the actions of animals , and attributed to a lofty positive principle what was . simply the result of circumstanoes ohiefly negative . At « ie period when history first caught sight of the Northern tribes , they-were ii A .. :., » l . a Himnll- « f * flimi < event . miiyrfttinnflJ in which ttll tllO COnCJltlOnS j ^* ^ Mi * £ 3— -- — — t ^ -- i
4 * Jt * Vl *^ 4 V *^* n V » " » WV *^» w . * w *^ « . - »« -- ., ^ _ flirt necessary to the enshrining of a Religion in Art were wanting ; and whentuo rush of nations soutlimird began to subside , Christian . ty was alhjody wp ^ tising German men and German ideas with new names , xumi " w one of the grandest and most purely indigenous my ^ £ 7 '"^ iihad , only an ! ideal , and ultimately a written ex atom «^_ J ^ JXi ^ fied into intelligible monuments such as the «« a ^ uc " ^ £ * ictu ^ 3 , topt , the , marble tejnples and UivimUes of Gl ^ . ' . ^ ^ p - orpotuated in and churches of Christianity . It was tor want of being tuua P or
Untitled Article
¥ ; .. ; ¦¦ . ¦ ¦ ¦ : ¦ ¦ ¦ ; y \ . ¦ . ¦ ¦ ¦ ¦ ¦ ' ' .. - ¦ ' ¦ ¦ ¦ ¦ ' ' ¦¦ - ¦¦ <^ mm ^ : M ^ m 2 ¦ ¦ ¦ . . iiaii ^ ABrE ^; _ ¦ ; . : . . ^
-
-
Citation
-
Leader (1850-1860), Sept. 22, 1855, page 917, in the Nineteenth-Century Serials Edition (2008; 2018) ncse2.kdl.kcl.ac.uk/periodicals/l/issues/vm2-ncseproduct2107/page/17/
-