dfacttell UniBEraity Sibrary Stljaca, New gark BOUGHT WITH THE INCOME OF THE SAGE ENDOWMENT FUND THE GIFT OF HENRY W. SAGE 1891 DATE DUE 1 -.J*^i : CA VLOHO PCKNTEO IN U.S.*. Cornell University Library DA 16.C22 British power and thought : 3 1924 027 930 332 Cornell University Library The original of tliis book is in tine Cornell University Library. There are no known copyright restrictions in the United States on the use of the text. http://www.archive.org/details/cu31924027930332 BRITISH POWEE AND THOUGHT BEITISH POWEE AND THOUGHT A HISTOBICAL INQUIRY BY THE HON. ALBERT S. G. CANNING AUTHOR OF 'BRITISH RULE AND MODEIIN POLITICS' 'HISTORY IN FACT AND FICTION* ETC. ' England ! model to thy inward greatness, Like little body with a mighty heart' Shakespere : Henry V. Act ii. LONDON SMITH, ELDEE, & CO., 15 WATEELOO PLACE [All rights rcsorved] • \\l\ \{\ fy^sqis CONTENTS CHAPTER I INTRODUCTOEY PAGE Pre-eminence of Christianity in the political world — Complete disappearance of the European Paganisms — Survival of Juda- ism under Pagan and under Christian rule ... 1 CHAPTEE II Mohammedanism replaces the Arabian idolatry, and shares with Christianity the chief power over modern nations — The Jews fall under the dominion of both — Revival of the Parsee faith in influence and intelligence under British rule in western India . 21 CHAPTEE III Tolerance of the Romans in ruling their various subjects — Modern European rulers follow their example far more now than in former times — Their success in this policy . 35 CHAPTEE IV Influence of literature throughout Britain— Social influence of Shakspere and Scott over the British public mind — Their usual adherence to historical facts .... 43 VIU BRITISH POWER AND THOUGHT CHAPTEE V PAGJJ Colonisation of America engages European thought and enter- prise — Their redirection to the lands famous in history — Transfer of political and intellectual supremacy from northern and eastern lands to the north and west of Europe 55 CHAPTEE VI Increase of literary study throughout Britain — Cultivation of the classics by British statesmen — Increased care and atten- tion devoted to the representation of Shakspere's plays . G6 CHAPTEE VII British triumphs chiefly in Asia and Africa — Political rivalry of European Powers after the fall of Napoleon — Increased con- fidence between Christian rulers and their Mohammedan subjects — Permanent value of Gibbon's Roman History acknowledged at the present time. . . . 77 CHAPTEE VIII Warlike tendencies of modern Christian nations — Comparatively weak state of the non-Christian world — Asia and Africa become more and more subject to Christian power and influence ... 88 CHAPTEE IX Contrast between the martial spirit of Christian nations and their peaceful faith — Legal severity in Britain towards political offences and differing religions rapidly diminishing — Comparative indifference of Christians and of non- Christians about religious conversion . . . 99 CONTENTS ix CHAPTEE X TAOK Christianity and Mohammedanism the chief religions exercising political power — Constancy of the Jews in preserving their faith uninfluenced by Christians or by Mohammedans — Modern exploration in Asia and Africa chiefly accomplished by Europeans 109 CHAPTEE XI Love of war in most nations from the earliest times — Dissen- sions betvreeu the most learned Christians during the Pro- testant Reformation — The previous division between the Greek and Latin Churches aroused less animosity . . 122 CHAPTEE XII Great increase of British influence after the fall of Napoleon — Spain and Portugal no longer formidable — Large standing armies maintained in Europe despite the general peace — Increasing popularity of the military art .... 139 CHAPTEE Xin National enmity between Christian Powers — Success of Britain, France, and Eussia in ruling non-Christian subjects . . 154 CHAPTEE XIV Christianity questioned by sceptical writers in Europe — Their failure in weakening its influence — Its paramount position in most civilised lauds — Shakspere's fame and influence . 167 a BEITISH POWEE AND THOUGHT CHAPTEE XV PAGE Shakspere's caution in describing historical characters — His freedom from party spirit when introdueiirg English civil wars — Milton's political vehemence a great contrast to him — Gibbon's dislike to the intolerance of Christians when in political power 181 CHAPTEE XVI Gibbon among the first English writers who describe Mohammed without prejudice — Hume's English History more devoted to describing the different kings than to the general state of England — Milton's poetical excellence contrasted with the coarse violence of some of his prose works — Scott's opinion of the Satan of Milton contrasted with the Mephistopheles of Goethe 195 CHAPTEE XVII Kemarkable position of William III., opposed by some Prelatists and Presbyterians in Britain and by Roman Catholics in Ireland — His policy more just and far-seeing than that of Cromwell — The Jacobite revolts of 1715 and 1745 — Scott's views about them in his Waverley Novels .... 209 CHAPTEE XVIII Scott and Dickens compared in some of their sketches of charac- ter — Their different views in describing London — Scott's impartiality in religious views and in sketches of historical characters — Decline of party spirit in Britain and its con- tinuance in Ireland — The rising of 1798— The French Bepublic and the Irish revolutionists 223 CONTENTS XI CHAPTEE XIX PAGE Contrast between Scott's influence over the Scottish, and Moore's influence over the Irish public mind — The unchanged in- fluence of the Catholic clergy in Ireland proved by the civil wars and revolts in that country and by the fall of Mr. Parnell — Hostility of the Catholic clergy to Napoleon . 235 CHAPTEE XX Attractive powers of Scott, Dickens, and Macaulay— Continued literary as well as political supremacy in the capitals of western Europe — Increase of newspapers throughout all civilised countries— Affairs of foreign lands engross British attention more than ever before ...... 246 CHAPTEE XXI The recent free discussion on religious truth by members of different denominations at Chicago — Change in modern Christian opinion about Mohammedanism — The last war in eastern Africa between Christians allied with Mohammedans against other Mohammedans 259 CHAPTEE XXII Loss of political power and aggressive energy by non-Christian nations — Asia and Africa now almost in the power of Europeans whose mutual jealousies alone retard their progress — The love of warfare now animates most Christian nations 274 Xll BKITISH POWER AND THOUGHT CHAPTBE XXIII PAGB Popularity of the war in South Africa throughout Britain and her colonies — Vast popularity of Queen Victoria — Her exemplary conduct and character more generally appre- ciated than ever before, at home and abroad . . . 292 BEITISH POWER AND THOUGHT nxT A -nmTiTi Errata Page viii line 6, for northern read southern " 55 " 5. M „ „ „ „ 272 „ 2, ,, Mhoammedanism read Mohammedanism Oaniiiug's British Power and Thought. by Turkish Mohammedans are practically maintained under their authority by the action as well as by the desire of European Christian Powers. In: Africa, Christian rule is absolute in parts of the north and south, the Cape of Good Hope under the British, and Algiers under the French, whilst its eastern part is B XU BRITISH POWER AND THOUGHT CHAPTEE XXIII PAGR Popularity of the war in South Africa throughout Britain and her colonies — Vast popularity of Qaeen Victoria — Her exemplary conduct and character more generally appre- ciated than ever before, at home and abroad . . . 292 BKITISH POWER AND THOUGHT CHAPTER I INTRODUCTOEY Pre-eminenoe of Christianity in the political world— Complete dis- appearance of the European Paganisms — Survival of Judaism under Pagan and under Christian rule. At the commencement of this twentieth century the paramount religion of the world is Christianity, and this fact cannot be denied by candid unbelievers. It is indeed the political ruler either directly or indirectly over a majority of the human race. Its political rule over Europe and America is undis- turbed, for the few provinces in the former still ruled by Turkish Mohammedans are practically maintained under their authority by the action as well as by the desire of European Christian Powers. In Africa, Christian rule is absolute in parts of the north and south, the Cape of Good Hope under the British, and Algiers under the French, whilst its eastern part is B 2 BRITISH POAVER AND THOUGHT the scene of a singular ' scramble,' as it has been called, of several European Christian Powers, who, though preserving or acknowledging Mohammedan rule in Egypt, indirectly rule it. Western Africa seems rather less interfered with, though the British and French have occasional small wars with its savage inhabitants, without hitherto acquiring, or perhaps caring to acquire, any great extent of its unhealthy territory, beyond some settlements on the coast. Asia remains as it has always been, the most important scene of religious contest and of political ambition, but the chief Powers who by war or by intrigue aim at ruling it are no longer Pagans or Mohammedans. They are now the Christian nations of Europe, Britain, Eussia, France, and latterly of Germany also, while Spain and Italy, though inferior in military strength, yet constitute with the above- named European Powers the most civilised countries of the modern world. All, or nearly all, these lands once believed in the religions of Jupiter or of Odin. The intellectual and poetic charm of the former, and the wild heroism of the latter, long claimed the re- ligious belief and veneration of European nations in former times. In Asia, Parseeism in Persia and other parts of central Asia and Judaism in the south BEITISH POWER AND THOUGHT 3 of Syria represented the principal religions com- municated through the medium of history to the modern world. While the former has been almost replaced by Mohammedanism in its ancient home — though now slowly reviving under British rule in India — Judaism in the world's religious history holds a very peculiar position since the Christian replace- ment of its political ruler, the classic Paganism. During centuries of ancient history this strictly monotheistic faith held its ground in Syria, neither converting nor being converted to any extent, while confined almost exclusively to the Jewish race. In their usually hostile intercourse with Syrian tribes, and during their captivity in Egypt and in Babylon, there seems to have been little capacity or inclination to attempt religious con- versions. The God of Abraham and of Moses was practically the God of the Jews alone in Hebrew estimation. Thus the chief religion of the ancient civilised world remained for centuries little disturbed in human belief, despite the changes in political history, till the birth of Jesus in Judea. He adhered to the Theism of the Jews taught daily in the Temple at Jerusalem, and, so far as is known, gave no opinion whatever about B 2 4 BRITISH POWER AND THOUGHT other religions. He pronounced apparently no special condemnation of the Koman Paganism, the State religion of His time, to which He and His Jewish fellow-countrymen were politically subject. In Jewish history, for the first time, the fond idea of the nation in believing itself specially favoured was virtually disclaimed by an acknowledged Jew. Jesus intimated no Divine preference for any par- ticular nation, insisting on the moral virtues in human nature being alone pleasing to its Creator. This idea was in His time practically carried out, though not perhaps expressed as a Divine precept, by the Eoman Government, which ruled nations in Europe, Asia, and Africa, of differing races and religions. It claimed complete political obedience and a payment of tribute, but it neither legally persecuted nor doctrinally condemned the religions of its various subjects. Thus, during the life of Jesus, His principles respecting human rights in matters of opinion were practically sanctioned by Eoman legis- lation, but nationally disallowed by the Jews. The leading features of the Old Testament are indeed not only the preservation and moral superiority of the Jewish race, but their divinely-assisted triumphs over other races. Their small, heroic, devout nation, BRITISH POWER AND THOUGHT 5 specially, though only by its own account, favoured by mankind's Creator, had been enabled to overcome its Syrian neighbours, and to survive the trials of temporary subjection by the comparatively powerful nations of Egyptians and Assyrians. When it subsequently fell under the Koman yoke, its ancestral Theism, the more precious owing to the Divine preference associated with its belief, inclined the Jews to despise and distrust the fanciful Paganism of their martial rulers. It does not appear that the Romans at any time desired the conversion of their Jewish subjects to the faith of Jupiter. These two great nations of Eomans and Jews, the former politi- cally supreme over nearly all the civilised world, the latter nationally confined to a small province of Syria, viewed each other with a mutual contempt which, considering their common superiority to all other nations at this period, appears almost in- credible. The career of Jesus, born in Judea as a Eoman subject, confining His labours to the Jews in their own country, while steadily avoiding allusion to the ruling Paganism, finally effected, though among a comparatively few people, a vast revolution in re- ligious belief. He adhered to the ancient Theism while denying Divine preference for its Jewish 6 BRITISH POWER AND THOUGHT votaries. He virtually supported Eoman political principles of legal, indiscriminate justice to dif- ferent nations and different religions without ex- pressing any recorded opinion upon the faith of Jupiter. The historical result of His teaching was finally the total disappearance of Paganism, and its replacement by Christianity. This new religion, or, as the Pagans might term it, new form of the Jewish faith, preserved the Old Testament tradi- tions, while appending to it the Gospel teaching which denied the national superiority of the Jewish race. The consequence was that when nearly all that race became the political subjects of Christian rulers, it still retained what has been called by an illustrious Christian descendant of theirs, ' only a part of their religion,' ' by believing in the Old Testament, while repudiating the New. The ancient faiths of Assyria, Egypt, and Arabia believed for centuries by millions are utterly extinct, apparently for ever. The intellectual faith of Greece and Eome is in one sense extinct as to practical belief, but in the knowledge and to some extent in the admiration of civilised men it seems immortal. The contem- porary faiths of Judaism and Parseeism survive, ' Disraeli's ii/e 0/ Bentinck, ok. xxiv. BRITISH POWER AND THOUGHT 7 and their politically disastrous history, yet partial resemblance, well deserves the study and the com- parison of thoughtful men. Each at one time was politically independent, the one in Syria alone, the other throughout the Persian Empire. But their histories were singularly different. Judaism, despite its political weakness and comparatively few votaries, from the earliest period of recorded time to the pre- sent has preserved its wonderful history. It claims, more positively than any other faith, to possess the only religious truth intimated by the Creator to a vast world of ignorant millions of men. Asia is indeed truly termed the birthplace of all religions. Nothing in the newly discovered world of America throws any light on the subject of religious truth. Asia in the diffusion, and Europe in the adoption and maintenance, of religious doctrines are pre-eminently distinguished. During centuries the imperial Pagan- ism of Greece and Rome, the singular religion of the Parsees, the warlike faith of Odin throughout northern Europe, and the cruel idolatry of Arabia, were the only religions capable of examination except the Jewish. This last faith was destined not only to continue in its earliest form among a small minority of men to the present day, but also to be 8 BRITISH POWEE AND THOUGHT partially believed in by the most powerful and most civilised nations of the modern world. Though politically helpless, and banished from their native land by the Eomans, against whom they hadjaade fierce revolts, the Jews firmly adhered to their religion in the different countries of their sub- sequent adoption. They beheld their Old Testament wrongly associated, as they thought, first with the Christian Gospel, and a few centuries later with the Mohammedan Koran in Arabia. They also beheld the Paganisms of Eome, northern Europe, and Arabia gradually replaced by Christians and by Moham- medans, both proclaiming the Jewish Old Testament as the foundation of religious truth, but denying Divine preference for the- Jews, by the teaching of the appended supplements of Gospel and Koran. After the replacement of the European Paganisms by Christianity and the subsequent rise of Moham- medanism, religious history became more and more subservient to political power among the most energetic races of Europe and Asia. Meantime, in central and eastern Asia and the greater part of Africa, comparatively slight progress was made by either of the two new religions. The Parsee faith of Persia, though nearly supplanted by victorious BRITISH POWER AND THOUGHT 9 Mohammedanism, survived among a small minority, and seems reviving in numbers and in importance under the British in western India, while Brahmin- ism and its offshoot, the religion of the virtuous Buddha, remain almost undisturbed, or little in- fluenced, by the changes of time throughout parts of central and eastern Asia. There seemed not much in either to arouse the extraordinary enthusiasm inspired by Christianity and by Mohammedanism. These ancient faiths alike remain, and have always remained, rooted in Asia alone. Their votaries ap- parently make few proselytes, except perhaps in remote parts of eastern Asia. The intellect of the civilised world has been for centuries, and continues, divided between Judaism and its disowned offshoots, Christianity and Mohammedanism. These three great religions alike rest on the Jewish Old Testa- ment as their common foundation. Biat this founda- tion contained an important doctrine, denied alike by the Christian and by the Mohammedan prophets — the preference for the Jews to other races of men by the Creator of all. This belief the Jews always maintained with natural tenacity. It was both their national pride in prosperity and chief consolation in adversity, and in 10 BRITISH POWER AND THOUGHT its firm belief this extraordinary race has never wavered. No religious history is so glorious in some respects, and so sad and depressing in others, as that of the Jews. During centuries, according to Christian and to Mohammedan belief, the Jews possessed the only true knowledge of the Creator, among all other races of men ; yet their services to mankind, as well as their intellectual supremacy, yielded greatly to those of the Pagan Greeks and Eomans. While the Jews were proclaiming themselves the chosen people, and despising not only their Syrian neighbours but the Egyptians, the Assyrians, in fact all nations they knew, as more or less odious in the sight of Heaven, the Greeks, in philosophic discussion, the Eomans, in wise and far-extended legislation, 'evinced a beneficent feeling towards mankind generally, of which the Jews in their conduct, even in their prayers, had ap- parently little idea. They scarcely showed interest in, far less friendship for, the numerous races of their fellow-men. If the Jews are to be judged by the sentiments indicated in some of David's Psalms, and by what is recorded of their national history, it was fortunate for mankind that they never were a ruling people, but BRITISH POWEE AND THOUGHT 11 lived within the limits of the small kingdom of Judea, engrossed in their national history, praising them- selves in comparison with every nation they knew, and caring little or nothing for any other. Yet to this small, peculiar, if not selfish, nation was confided, according to their own, to Christian, and to Moham- medan belief, the sole custody of religious truth for many centuries. During this vast lapse of ages the most intellectual races of men in Europe, Egypt, and western Asia were believing in different religions utterly disavowed by their posterity as mere fabul- ous inventions. Yet except by a few utter sceptics among the Greeks and Eomans, their singular and in some respects beautiful and innocent Paganism was devoutly trusted. Even sceptics born in this faith scarcely examined, and far less believed in, the Jewish Theism. Among Greeks and Eomans, their gods were thought to share in most of the passions of mankind. During the memorable siege of Troy they were supposed to take an active part in the contest, which divided the observant, even participating, deities into opponents. Yet in the main points the supreme god Jupiter resembled in justice and benevolence to man- kind the good deity Ormuzd of the Parsees and the 12 BRITISH POWER AND THOUGHT God of the Jews as announced by Jesus and by Mohammed. But the God of the Jews, though just, wise, omniscient, and omnipotent, seems by their account to take little interest in other races of men, though somewhat vaguely indicated as the Creator of all. When he notices any other nation except the Jews, it is usually to rebuke, punish, or afflict them. Though the Jews, by their own version of their extra- ordinary history, often offended their God and were punished by Him, yet not only forgiveness, but special favour always followed. In the histories of the two great classic nations, the Greeks and Eomans, religious discussion was frequent and carried on by thoughtful men in argument and in literature. But such discussion the Jews seem to have rather avoided. They neither had nor wished to have much religious intercourse with other nations. They rather repelled religious interference or discussion. They were the one enlightened nation, according to their own idea, and thus became peculiarly odious and unpopular among all others who came in contact with them. Firmly believing in their national preference by a universal Creator, the Jews, when under Eoman rule, maintained their ancestral pride despite their political degradation, when Jesus appeared among them during BEITISH POWER AND THOUGHT 13 the reign of Tiberius Caesar. The Child called and thought Jesus of Nazareth, as He grew up, was of course surrounded by Jewish fellow-countrymen whom He was said to have astonished when a youth by the wisdom of His language uttered in the national Temple at Jerusalem. He practically, however, re- pudiated the proud and long-cherished idea of Jewish preference in the sight of Heaven. The true God, He proclaimed, had no special favour for any parti- cular locality or race of men. This new doctrine Jesus declared while a quiet subject of the Eoman Emperor, living entirely in the subdued yet haughty, discontented province of Judea. His own nation heard Him with mingled alarm, indignation, and in- credulity. The Eomans heard Him, or rather, heard of Him, with comparative indifference, not, perhaps, without some feelings of indulgence. He was to them nothing more than a rather eloquent young preacher, who said nothing against their authority, and virtually agreed with them in repudiating the alleged superiority of the Jewish race to all others. This idea was practically a constant obstacle to the rule of the Eomans, yet was to them probably a matter of ridicule, at times, perhaps, not unmingled with alarm. It certainly tended to preserve among 14 BRITISH POWER AND THOUGHT the subjected race not only a constant desire to shake off Koman rule, but a stolid belief that sooner or later they would be able to do so by Divine aid. This last hope, so consoling to Jewish national pride in their national degradation, Jesus evidently dis- couraged by sanctioning payment of tribute to the Eoman Emperor. He also did so in the most practical manner, by relating parables in which the subjected race by supposed unworthy specimens were always represented in the wrong. He moreover reproached the Jewish clergy for their pride or hypocrisy, without naming particular individuals; but as a deliberate censure on the class generally. These parables and direct charges, so able, so irritating, yet strangely attractive in their style, were addressed almost, if not quite, exclusively to the Jews themselves, though uttered under the political protection of Eoman authority. At this period of the world's his- tory, from which Christians date time, when the most important Divine revelation was only believed by a minority of those who heard it, and was unknown to the vast majority of men, the relative positions of Europe, Asia, and Africa invite a comparative con- sideration. Asia was only partially known to Europe, chiefly through the medium of religious history. BRITISH POWER AND THOUGHT 15 Throughout Persia the Parsee faith prevailed, while in the more remote countries of India, Tibet, and China, Buddhism or Brahminism were, as far as is known, the chief religions possessing much influence. In Arabia, destined to play so important a part in religious history, there prevailed a cruel superstition demanding human sacrifices, from which the father of its future destroyer, Mohammed, narrowly escaped. This savage heathenism was apparently supported by no literature, adorned with no works of art, and seems to have presented little if any attraction for mankind. Yet it had continued for a long period the firm belief of obedient though uneducated votaries. Compared with such a creed, the intellectual faith of Greek and Eoman Paganism presented a most enlightened contrast. The extraordinary series of inventions in the latter, as they are now termed, have afforded great attractions to learned men in subsequent ages. The faith is now thought merely fabulous, yet was the firm belief during many cen- turies of the wisest men the world has ever seen — wisest because, unlike the Jews, they knew nothing of Divine truth unless it may have to some extent been combined with their fanciful ideas, though utterly disavowed by posterity. Their transmitted wisdom 16 BRITISH POWER AND THOUaHT in philosophy, poetry, and legislation is to this day studied, and in many respects imitated as well as admired, by the Christian world, while their re- ligion is now despised as a mere fable. It is a mistake to suppose it was also despised by its pro- fessed believers. Of course in Pagan, as in Jewish and in Christian, history there was always a minor- ity of atheists or critical sceptics ; but, generally speaking, during many centuries the faith of Jupiter among Greeks and Eomans was both a trusted and admired creed. Among its deities there was cer- tainly much to admire and to venerate. The same can hardly be said of its warlike, mysterious con- temporary, the religion of Odin, throughout northern and central Europe. This strange faith, of which no document remains, had yet something ennobling in ancient tradition, but, unlike the Greek Paganism, has bequeathed little to interest civilised men, and seems to have altogether vanished with its political influence among warlike votaries. But the classic Paganism, after its complete replacement by Christianity, re- tained appreciation among scholars instead of believers. The triumphant Christians united the Jewish Old Testament with its disowned Christian supplement. The later Mohammedans proclaimed BRITISH POWER AND THOUGHT 17 the truth of the Old Testament, and to some extent that of the New, acknowledging Jesus as a human, not a Divine, manifestation of God to man. The believers in both these comparatively new religions utterly condemned their ancestral faiths, the classic and Scandinavian Paganisms and the Arabian idolatry, which they thoroughly replaced in every land. But Judaism, though no longer professed by an independent kingdom, remained and still remains the faith of a nation, subjected and scattered indeed, yet in religious belief utterly invincible by the power of man, or by all the changes of recorded time. It is surely evident at least to Europeans that among these three religions of the Book, Judaism, Christianity, and Mohammedanism, lies the main secret of religious truth. Eminent scholars may indeed discover, or think they discover, much truth in Buddhism or Parseeism. But Judaism, the oldest faith in the world which is verified by historical literature, with its additions of Christianity and Mohammedanism, has steadily occupied the chief place in religious estimation among civilised races since the downfall of the classic Paganism. The gods and goddesses of the latter faith, though now quite excluded from the belief of every nation, every village, or family, remain, c 18 BRITISH POWER AJ^D THOUGHT and probably will always remain, admired among learned Europeans. They alike represent, in poetical language, the chief attractions of human nature, power, strength, beauty, wisdom, and valour, in their highest forms. Though often displaying strong human passions, they were always represented far superior to mankind in mental as well as in physical qualities. They were deeply impressed on the minds espe- cially of Italian descendants of former believers, and reappeared splendidly in their finest works of art. But all belief in their existence was replaced by Christianity. The wonderful destiny of Eome itself, exchanging, as it were, the physical for the moral ascendancy over most civilised nations, must always be viewed as one of the most impressive events in the religious history of man. In subsequent wars the religious and political histories of predominant European races became strangely mingled. Utterly rejecting ancient beliefs as mere fables without the least foundation, the mediaeval and modern European nations established for themselves a religious and an intellectual history of a singularly comprehensive nature. Thus the philosophy and poetry of Greece, and the legislation, and to some extent the colonial BEITISH POWER AND THOUGHT 19 policy, of Eome were selected as the fit studies for the European youth in Britain and in most Conti- nental countries. But in religious history, the jealously preserved records of the Jewish race em- bodied in their Old Testament became devoutly trusted, when united with the long subsequent teach- ing of the Christian Gospel. The Jews beheld this extraordinary blending of creeds, each derived from their history, with profound distrust, which has remained unchanged among that scattered race to the present time, and apparently without diminu- tion. The uniting of the Old and the New Testa- ments into one harmonious Bible, as Christians thought it, and the later association of both in historical course with the Koran by the Moham- medans, were viewed by the Jews not only with complete distrust, but with fresh political appre- hension. For alike in the Christian Gospel and in the Mohammedan Koran was pronounced a rather similar censure on their race. Jesus and Mohammed had been each opposed by them ; yet the followers of both prophets had politically triumphed more or less throughout Europe, Asia, and Africa, and the ancient race gradually became almost entirely their political subjects. It is hardly possible to imagine a severer c 2 20 BRITISH POWER AND THOUGHT test than was applied both by religious and by political history to the unconquerable faith of the Jewish race. Yet it triumphed completely in its heroic retention of their ancestral Old Testament, rejecting alike and successively the Gospel and the Koran as unauthorised additions to the one true faith of the world. Christians and Moham- medans gradually obtained supreme undisputed power throughout Europe, and over the most im- portant countries in Asia and Africa. This position, supreme alike in political power and educational enlightenment, Christianity and Mohammedanism still maintain. In the latter advantage the sub- jected Jews rival, sometimes may excel, their political rulers ; but political independence and national resto- ration seem still withheld from them, though their return to Judea is now more discussed, and perhaps more likely than ever since the national dispersion. BRITISH POWER AND THOUaHT 21 CHAPTEE II Mohammedanism replaces the Arabian Idolatry, and shares with Christianity the chief power over modern nations- The .Tews fall under the dominion of both— Revival of the Parsee faith in influence and intelligence under British rule in western India. After the fall of the Eoman Empire, which only towards its close became Christian, Europe was gradually divided among Christian kingdoms and empires. Western Asia and northern Africa be- came Mohammedan, and for some time menaced Christian supremacy in Europe ; but eventually this warlike faith retired into its original homes of Asia and Africa, and only a few provinces in eastern Europe became Mohammedan under Turkish rule. In these the varied population had been chiefly copiposed of Christians of the Greek Church. When supreme in Europe, Christianity gradually effaced its two predecessors, the faiths of Jupiter and of Odin ; yet in their extinction by Christian sup- planters a different mode of social replacement was adopted by their successors. In abolishing the 22 BRITISH POWEE AND THOUGHT former faith, the Christians viewed with admiration the noble poetry, the wise legislation, and the en- lightened philosophy transmitted to them by the sage, though in some respects ignorant. Pagans of Greece and Eome. This heritage of classic poetry, history, and philosophy was thus preserved by successive Chris- tian generations, while the Pagan religion, despite its artistic and poetic adornments, has been ever since its downfall pronounced a mere fable, though allowed by the Creator to remain for centuries the religion of the wisest men who ever lived. The faith of Odin being also completely effaced, Europe, strong, energetic, and enthusiastic, began its triumphant reign over mankind, aided by the legislative wisdom of the ancient Pagans, instructed by their philosophy, enlightened by their poetry, but depending entirely for religious belief on the history of the Jews. Yet their majestic faith, though in its ancient history scarcely changed, was materially altered in its philosophic teaching by the additions of Christianity and Mohammedanism. The rise and triumph of Mohammedanism a few centuries after the death of Jesus did not materially affect the relative positions of dominant Christianity and of subjected Judaism. Mohammed censured BEITISH POWER AND THOUGHT 23 Christians for believing a virtuous Prophet equal to God, and also censured the Jews for executing Him. But his religion, like that of Jesus, distinctly denied all Divine preference for the Jews, while both retained the traditions of the Jewish Old Testament. In time the scattered Jews, who nearly all became subject to Christians and to Mohammedans, thus beheld the Greek and Arabian Paganisms replaced by a part of their own religion, but with the additions of Gospel or Koran, which they alike disowned. The Koran, however, while denying the divinity of Jesus, greatly extolled Him as a true Prophet, whereas no allusion to Mohammed was believed by Christians to be found in the Gospel. He was for a long period in Christian history thought merely a deluded or delud- ing impostor. Eecent years, however, through increasing acquaintance with Mohammedans, repre- sent their prophet as a benefactor to his country, who in many respects acknowledged the Jewish and the Christian faiths, and certainly freed Arabia from a debasing idolatry. Christianity and Mohamme- danism, while replacing European and Arabian heathenisms, showed almost a jealous rivalry in making conversions. The Jews, during these pro- selytising triumphs, remained politically powerless, 24 BRITISH POWER AND THOUGHT while doctrinally as firm and numerous as ever. Though inhabiting different countries and more or less oppressed in them, the Jews, rejecting all new doctrines, preserved the Old Testament with nation- ally jealous exactness. This origin of the three religions, they maintained, made no allusion whatever to either Jesus or Mohammed. Unfortunately for mankind, this original bond of union, this one all- important Book so constantly read, referred to, and trusted by Jews, Christians, and Mohammedans, led to no alliance, or even spirit of charity, between them. Their common sublime conception of the world's Creator appears throughout the Jewish Old Testament in occasional glimpses often obscured by the national partiality imputed to Him by that nation. It was confirmed, though free from such preference, by Christians, and afterwards by Moham- medans. The idea of a just God seems also manifest in the Parsee deity Ormuzd, while the faith of Buddha, though vaguely indicated, may perhaps somewhat express that character. An invisible Being, uniting omnipotence with extreme benevolence, and thorough knowledge of human nature with total exemption from its passions and weaknesses, has always been the firm belief of the chief religious BRITISH POWER AND THOUGHT 25 teachers throughout the world, however they may- differ in other doctrines. But the supreme God of the Greeks and Eomans, while preserving many noble attributes, in ruling mankind on the whole with justice and benevolence, was yet in conduct and character a human being. Jupiter was, in fact, the type of a benevolent monarch, sharing as well as knowing the feelings of human nature. He ruled men for their good — not always preferring the victorious, while sometimes consoling the defeated— through indicating eternal happiness to virtuous souls in the future Elysian fields, while condemning the evil to the gloom of Hades. Meanwhile the old and comparatively stationary faiths, Parseeism and Brahminism, were believed in the greater part of Asia for centuries, but their political fate was far different. The former narrowly escaped extinction by replacing Mohammedans, while the latter remained established till the rise of the Buddha. The religion of this great teacher, whose doctrines are considered by some European scholars, Max-Miiller among them, as a great improvement on Brahminism, though an offshoot from it, was replaced by its predecessor in the greater part of India, but still prevails throughout a large part of central and eastern Asia. 26 BRITISH POWEE AND THOUGHT Max-Miiller calls it the daughter of Brahminism, but more beautiful than the mother. All other religions surviving in Asia, Africa, or in America seem vague, ignorant heathenisms, scarcely deserving the name of a particular faith. The partial but apparently steady revival of Parseeism under British rule in western India indicates a chance of this most ancient faith resuming its place among civilised men. Yet though its revival is surprising, it is far surpassed in important results by the extraordinary survival of subjected, long per- secuted Judaism. This faith has certainly e^idured and morally triumphed over more persecution than any other religion in the history of the world. Yet, unlike Christians, the Jews preserve no record of their co- religionists who died for their faith. No Jewish saints or martyrs are historically celebrated. While Christian history abounds with traditions of its saints and martyrs, while even Mohammedans celebrate with pious enthusiasm the martial glories and perilous escapes of their heroic Prophet, the days of Jewish triumph seem never commemorated. In the minds of the truly devout, however, it may be thought that the preservation of a persecuted faith for many BRITISH POWER AND THOUGHT 27 centuries despite every human effort at suppression, is an unequalled reward, and the surest triumph of the invincible nature of religious conviction. It may be thought the more glorious, being wholly unsupported by the sympathy due to the glorified memories of saints or martyrs. This sympathy has always been specially claimed by the Christian Church, celebrating with all the aids of music, poetry, painting, and sculpture the noble lives or heroic deaths of its devoted followers. The Jews, at least since the Christian triumph, have in these respects been comparatively disregarded. No charms of the fine arts have come to their aid or vindication. These attractive resources were devoted in Italy especially to the glorification of the Christian religion, while the victims of the triumphant faith remained unnoticed. The beginning of this twentieth century, however, beholds a great contradiction of the proverb as to the sure falling of a house divided against itself. Since the triumphs of Christianity and of Moham- medanism, both religions have endured internal dis- sensions among other dangers. The Mohammedans, in differing about who was the right successor to their Prophet, disputed fiercely together, but the chief prin- ciples of their common faith remain firmly believed. 28 BRITISH POWEE AND THOUGHT The dissenBions among Christians after the fall of Paganism were as bitter and as relentless as the worst enemy of the faith could have desired. Yet the majestic religion itself, in its leading doctrines and political history, has ever since remained steadily believed by a majority of civilised men. While the ancient Paganisms of Europe and of Arabia have totally vanished, their supplanters, Christianity and Mohammedanism, remain triumphant in the scenes of their former glory. Yet to thoughtful minds the revival of Judaism, and the revival of Parseeism during the last century, are among its most re- markable events. These ancient faiths fully rival, if they do not surpass, those of Jupiter and of Odin in the reverence of the most remote antiquity. While they were allied with national power or independence, the European Paganisms were also firmly established in the belief of many civilised men ; and long after they disappeared, Christianity and Mohammedanism, despite their political triumph, were greatly divided, though not weakened, by eager disputes among their respective votaries. The Jews gradually became the helpless subjects of both Christians and Mohammedans, while the Parsees were locally replaced by the latter. In fact, BRITISH POWER AND THOUGHT 29 their four religions were singularly opposed in political history. The Jews and Christians could not avoid knowing each other's differences thoroughly, but the doctrines or traditions they retained in common apparently inclined the latter all the more to inflict, and the former to endure, the most relent- less persecution. The enmity of Mohammedans to Parsees was, if possible, of a yet deeper nature. The latter in great measure were forced to join the faith of their conquerors, but some of the few who escaped from Persia are evidently reviving in numbers, wealth, and influence under the British in India. In their remarkable instance the protection afforded by British authority has been most successful in practical results. But this revival is of recent date, as during many centuries the Parsees were seldom heard of in either European or Asiatic politics. The Jewish revival of late years, especially during the nineteenth century, is much more important, and also a more interesting event in the extraordinary annals of religious history. The legalised systematic course of oppression which that race endured for many centuries in almost every country they in- habited, instead of diminishing their numbers or their influence, has apparently had in some countries 80 BRITISH POWER AND THOUGHT the opposite effect of increasing both. Though still disliked and to some extent oppressed in parts of Europe, the Jews are certainly richer, more numer- ous, and more influential, at least in Britain, than since their national banishment. The latter years of the nineteenth century have actually beheld the unconverted votaries of Judaism and Parseeism selected in a few cases by British Christians to represent them in Parliament. In that assembly of the best educated, most intelligent and trusted men in the British Empire, these representatives of the two oldest and most persecuted faiths took their places on terms of perfect equality. This spectacle, even a century ago, would have seemed most unlikely and most undesirable in every Christian country. It would probably have been thought dangerous to the interests of Christianity itself. Yet that religion, in military ascendancy, power, and political extension, was never so supreme as at present. Throughout America it has replaced the native heathenisms from end to end of that immense con- tinent, as well as in its numerous islands. In Africa it is indirectly supreme from north to south in a political sense. No non-Christian Government of any aggressive power exists in its entire boundary. All BEITISH POWER AND THOUGHT 31 Europe politically obeys Christianity, aa Turkish rule over a few provinces is maintained by the wish of the western Powers of Europe. Asia remains more divided than any other part of the world in religious opinions. It is termed the birthplace of all religions, and up to the present time the only non-Christian nations of political importance are there. Yet, gener- ally speakiQg, they are becoming more or less subject to Christian interference or influence. Even China, its most remote part inhabited by a singularly exclusive, jealous, and suspicious people, is becoming more and more threatened by European alliances against her ancient independence. At first it was chiefly Britain which for trading purposes interfered with this strange, repelling country. At present, Eus- sians, Germans, British, and French take increasing interest in its afl!airs and development every year. The exclusive, almost unchangeable Chinamen indis- criminately viewed all other nations as ' foreign devils,' while calling themselves Celestials, and trying to remain inaccessible. Never before were they so seriously menaced by Christian Europe as they are at present. Yet this is also a period when among Christian nations, religious or sectarian interests have apparently far less influence than formerly 32 BRITISH POWER AND THOUGHT While the destinies of various countries are discussed from different points of view in Eussia, Britain, France, and Germany, the object of these Powers seems rather commercial security or political supre- macy than any religious extension or development. They now apparently care little about making conversions to their different forms of Christianity. Some zealous individuals in every religious denomina- tion may continue to exhort people to support various missions, and do all they can to spread different forms of religion. But in the political government of the Christian world this desire seems to be very secondary, if not almost ignored. This great change in the re- ligious feelings of Christian rulers must strongly impress most readers acquainted with former Christian history. The increasing political power of Christians accompanying such a practical concession to other religions is a most remarkable coincidence of the present age. In fact the faith was never so politically in the ascendant, yet doctrinally so tolerant if not so yielding to the interests of others, as during recent years. No non-Christian Power seriously endangers Christian political ascendancy, yet non-Christians under its rule were never so much trusted or so influential before. The vast change BRITISH POWER AND THOUGHT 33 in Christian estimation of different faiths is, however, more practically proved than as yet formally acknowledged. While Christian rulers, travellers and men of business govern, describe, and deal with non-Christians, often in a spirit of confidential friendship, the feelings still avowed by some zealous or bigoted Christians and non-Christians would have little influence over men of practical experience. Yet, despite the great and increasing intercourse between different nations, considerable differences still occur among fellow-Christians about Church doc- trines, while from a legal standpoint, in most civilised countries, the precepts of the Middle Ages to favour or persecute differing forms of the same religion seem almost abandoned. With this change in popular feeling there appears a comparative indiffer- ence in Christian Governments about the spread or influence of their own faith. In the many diplomatic disputes now so frequent in Asia, especially in China and Turkey, among the Christian Powers, the interests of religious propagation seem little regarded. All these intrigues or rivalries are for the benefit or defence of opposing commercial or political interests. The non-Christian rulers of Asia, except in China, where immense numbers of subjects make them D 84 BRITISH POWER AND THOUGHT chiefly formidable, are nearly helpless in dealing with the Christian Powers. The latter, no longer stimulated by religious zeal, as in the days of the Crusades, seem little interested in extending the religion of the Cross, though they firmly profess it. The disputes between Christian and non-Christian nations in Asia now seem chiefly the rivalry of the former in taking all possible advantage of the political weakness and territorial wealth of the latter. The historical student will perceive that some objects for which Christians formerly sacrificed the interests of their own countries are now in their power, but have lost their attraction or claim as a religious duty. The modern Christian mind has apparently undergone a remarkable diminution of zeal in enjoining the duty of religious extension and development. BRITISH POWER AND THOUGHT 35 CHAPTER III Tolerance of the Romans in riling their various subjects — Modern European rulers follow their example far more now than in former times — Their success in this policy. The records of extreme antiquity describe the Pagan nations of Europe, Asia, and Africa as contemporary with devout Jewish Theists in the south of Syria. None of these nations in early times seems to have desired religious conversions like their mediaeval successors. Accordingly, later on in history we find Christians and Mohammedans replacing European and Asiatic Paganisms, and acknowledging the Jewish Old Testament, while energetically opposing each other. Amid this excess of religious enthu- siasm, often sanctioning intolerant cruelty, the Jews silently preserved their faith, shared as it was in great measure by their victorious rulers. Though no longer openly exulting in alleged Divine prefer- ence, but scattered among many nations, and utterly repudiating both Christianity and Mohammedanism, D 2 36 BRITISH POWER AND THOUGHT the Jews remained in religion unchanged as ever. Centuries of their political subjection elapsed ; Chris- tian and Mohammedan triumph seemed almost com- plete politically, while Paganisms had either vanished or become comparatively unaggressive in every known country. Then was the time when Christians and Mohammedans were almost the sole rivals for worldly power, at least among civilised nations. But this competition, though eager while it lasted, did not long continue. The latter practically yielded both in Europe and Asia before the invasions, the in- trigues, and the revolts of the Christians. Long before, but especially during the time of Napoleon, Christian nations, entirely animated by political motives, and no longer dreading Mohammedan power, waged most destructive warfare among themselves. This wonderful man was finally crushed by a Euro- pean alliance against him while heading the French nation alone with almost absolute power. Since his fall, the European nations, once united against him, have often been at war with each other, but their territorial boundaries were little affected by the results, while Christianity has steadily prevailed among them all. Italy and Greece have indeed, since Napoleon's time, become independent kingdoms, BEITISH POWER AND THOUGHT 87 but as yet cannot be considered very influential in European politics. Britain, Eussia, France, and Germany seem now the countries on which the fate both of Asia and Africa in great measure depends. America as yet seems surprisingly free from national complications, and from every sign of probability seems likely to remain so. Asia and Africa, especially in their eastern parts, now greatly attract the attention of the European Powers for the first time in history. It may surely be confidently expected that the effect of increasing European inter- course will civilise all nations who for the first time enjoy its full advantages. In these political changes the tolerant principles of Pagan Eome in ruling foreign subjects are politically followed by most Christian Governments. In this respect they greatly differ both in theory and practice from their early predecessors. The international concord now shown seems a revival of the Eoman ideas of colonial rule, while the political supremacy of various forms of Christianity prevails in nearly every ruling nation without checking the reviving importance of the Jews in Europe and of the Parsees in India. The votaries of these faiths no longer enjoy 88 BRITISH POWER AND THOUGHT national independence, but are gradually increasing in influence throughout the British Empire. The increasing intercourse between Europe and central and eastern Asia will probably bring the Buddhist faith more and more before Christian attention ; but hitherto these remote, vast countries seem somewhat inaccessible to direct European conquest. Unless a sudden uprising of some Buddhist or Mohammedan champion occurs, the extended preva- lence of European influence over the entire world seems nearer than ever at the opening of this twentieth century. The extraordinary political history of Christianity, the most powerful of existing religions, has been marked by internal dissensions perhaps even more than by wars with unbelievers. During many years the Papacy ruled nearly all Christians. Its first and most important dispute was with the Greek or eastern Church. This dissension, however, though serious and permanent, did not cause much religious persecution. But the subse- quent Protestant revolt against the Papacy, arising in the most civilised countries under its control, unequally divided the greater part of Europe into differing sects. Judaism and Atheism alike watched their contest calmly to all appearance. The former, BRITISH POAVER AND THOUGHT 3D confined to an exclusive, devout, yet subjected race, took no advantage, and tried to take none, of these Christian dissensions, which for years exasperated the most learned and pious members of that faith against each other. But Atheism, chiefly in France for a short time, boldly asserted itself, though with very short-lived success. Christianity, divided be- tween Eoman Catholicism and different forms of Protestantism, expressed the religious ideas of the greater part of Europe, while the Eastern Church, confined to Greece and to Russia, took no part in this later contest. Atheism doubtless existed in most European lands, but remained, except for its brief triumph in France, quite unsupported by public opinion or by political government. Mohammedan nations, though some were strong, aggressive, and devout, took no advantage of these Christian quarrels, which after a deplorable sanguinary period subsided into peaceful profession in different countries of various forms of the Christian faith. Since that time in Europe, and since the rise of Mohammed in Asia, no new religious faith has been announced or preached among civilised men. The immense discoveries, the territorial changes, the vast edu- cational progress and great increase of international 40 BRITISH POWEK AND THOUGHT communication during late years have really brought nothing new on the subject of religious knowledge. In churches, synagogues, and mosques the Old Testament, with or without its Christian or Moham- medan supplements of Gospel and Koran, still claims the belief of most civilised men. In religious history, Jesus and Mohammed are, as it were, modern characters when compared with Zoroaster, or even with the Buddha, still claiming the reverence of Parsees and Buddhists, while Jupiter and Odin are, after their long and glorious mental prevalence over some of the wisest men, no longer associated with religious belief. The former indeed, with his intel- lectual court of gods and goddeeses, remains an object of classic interest and admiration to learned scholars. Yet these feelings now chiefly arise from the influence of the fine arts, the noble poetry, mag- nificent sculpture, and beautiful paintings which transmit the charms of the classic mythology to appreciating modern scholars, though no longer to believers. At the present time throughout Europe, the Old Testament or its rival successors the Gospel and the Koran, now reign supreme in every country where these two vanished Paganisms once existed. In BRITISH POWER AND THOUGHT 41 considering the grand position of Britain amid existing nations — which since the fall of Napoleon no very dangerous foe has ever menaced — it seems evident that her power neither needs nor seeks territorial extension in Europe. It is now in Asia and Africa where British influence is the chief subject of political importance, interest, and anxiety. The literary foundation on which British character and knowledge have been chiefly formed to a great extent resembles that of other Christian nations, though with some remarkable points of difference. In religious belief all the chief European nations agree in accepting the Old Testament, while interpret- ing the New according to different versions. Yet in its leading principles as well as in its historic tradi- tions the civilised world in its chief countries, nominally at least, professes the principal doctrines of the Christian faith. In the departments of science, literature, and art, the various European nations have shown a rather similar respect, even admiration, for the classic models of Greece and Eome. The ancient national legends of other Euro- pean countries seem discredited or wholly ignored. In most, if not all, the chief European colleges, the philosophy of Pagan Greece and Eome is carefully 42 BllITISH POWER AND THOUGHT studied as the foundation of European taste and education. Throughout the modern civilised world, in religion, philosophy, poetry, and legislation, Judea, Greece, and Eome are the standard models for those powerful nations who now control the destinies of the non- Christian as well as of the Christian world. The new countries comprised throughout America and Australasia, though mostly ruled or inhabited by European Christians or by their descendants, appar- ently do little for the advancement of political civilisa- tion. They with the lands famed in antiquity, in northern Africa and central and western Asia, re- main in many respects passive about the rest of the world. The chief power, ambition, and enterprise during present times appear confined to northern and central Europe. It is in Britain, Russia, Germany, and France where appreciation of the past history of the world is allied most remarkably with almost undisputed power over its future destiny. In a political sense, therefore, Christianity was never so supreme as at the present time, nor yet so generally tolerant towards every other religion, both in theory and practice. BEITISH POWER AND THOUGHT 4R CHAPTEE IV Influence of literature throughout Britain— Social influence of Shakspere and Scott over the British public mind — Their usual adherence to historical facts. The influence of literature on national character is, especially in the case of Britain, an interesting as well as instructive subject. While forming early tastes on the literary models of Judea, Greece, and Eome, the British, for a long period, had little else to study. Their ancestral legends, chiefly transmitted in vague, partly discredited poems, were neither alto- gether proved or disproved, but in time they appa- rently disappeared from British investigation. On the other hand, the countries as well as the literature of Judea, G-reece, and the Eoman Empire became more and more visited, examined, and explored. Thus when the unrivalled British Christian writers, Shakspere, Bacon, Ben Jonson, Milton, Dryden, and others, began to form the British literary taste, they made frequent allusions to classic history, while rarely 44 BRITISH POWER AND THOUGHT mentioning the historic or poetical legends of their own country. In their magnificent works in prose and verse, the ancient glories of Jewish, Greek, and Eoman history reappear in the full appreciation of comparatively modern minds completely free from national prejudice. In process of time nearly all countries named in the Bible and in classic literature have fallen under Christian power or indirect influence. The British reading public about Shakspere's time, as shown in the writings of Bacon, Ben Jonson, and Walter Ealeigh, took special delight in recalling classic history. Shakspere, in his noble plays relating to Greece and Eome, and to a less extent his contem- porary Jonson, evidently interested literary fellow Englishmen greatly, by the peculiar charm of their classic allusions. Shakspere, of all dramatists, British or foreign, seems unrivalled in making characters, whether historical or invented, as natural as if he were recording the acts and thoughts of personal acquaintances. ' Troilus and Cressida,' though not thought one of his best works, yet introduces the reader to the memorable, extra- ordinary siege of Troy, which in Homer's description is among the first studies of educated Europeans. BRITISH POWER AND THOUGHT 45 The rare combination of philosophic wisdom, of martial animation, and of descriptive power so attractive in Homer reappears, though with yet more knowledge of human nature, in Shakspere's few classical plays. The dress, armour, and furni- ture of the time Shakspere seldom mentions. In these respects the poet materially differs from his romantic literary successor Sir Walter Scott, who, from the characters of kings or queens to details about old furniture, carries his readers back to for- mer times with the accurate precision of a learned antiquary. This Shakspere seldom tries to do. He confines himself almost entirely to human nature, and leaves its worldly surroundings comparatively unnoticed. But his characters are reality itself. His wonderful knowledge of mankind, and yet his very slight acquaintance with foreign countries, are among his characteristics. He is not known to have left England, and he seldom introduces foreigners of his own period. But his ancient Greek and Eoman personages seem generally to quite agree with their historic descriptions, while inspired with a lifelike energy and interest, as if described by an acquaintance. He makes little allusion to local particulars or distinctions. It is evident that none of his plays 46 BEITISH POWER AND THOUGHT referring to foreign countries was written by a traveller, or apparently by one acquainted with travellers. Shakspere evidently possessed few, if any, of the advantages of foreign intercourse, or personal knowledge of any country but his own. His characters are nearly all of an English, or at least a European, type. Travellers in Morocco would recognise little resemblance between Othello, for instance, and Arab or Moorish chiefs. The character is far more like an impetuous, brave, yet excitable European officer than an Oriental convert from Mohammedanism to Christianity. Cleopatra has little or nothing of the Asiatic or African about her. In Paris or in London, among the most crafty and accomplished of the demi-monde, she would find real resemblance, rather than in the palaces of Oriental monarchs. Shakspere, either through ignorance of foreign countries, or indifference to their peculiarities, seldom surrounds his personages with local associations, or notices national distinctions. Even in ' Macbeth,' a play chiefly laid in Scotland, and full of Scottish characters, neither the accent nor the dress of that country, though so close to England, is mentioned. The assassins hired by Macbeth and his retainers at Glamis Castle have nothing Scottish about them. They might have been natives of BRITISH POWER AND THOUGHT 47 London, from their language, and neither their weapons nor their dress is described. In ' Henry V.,' however, Shakspere very briefly introduces a Scotsman, a Welshman, and an Irishman with a faint tincture of national peculiarities in manner and accent, but soon dismisses them. In the play of ' Henry IV.' Welsh chiefs are certainly introduced, but neither they nor the Scottish chiefs in ' Macbeth ' speak in their respective accents, and their dresses are not mentioned. Perhaps Shakspere, when introducing a Scotsman, a Welshman, and an Irishman — Jamy, Fluellen, and Macmorris in ' Henry V.'- — wished to show the English public that he knew some of their national peculiarities, without associating them with his more important characters. The national differences, which Sir Walter Scott describes so fully and with evident interest, Shakspere usually disre- gards. He attends nearly exclusively to delineating characters, and the general voice of public opinion pronounces his genius in this respect unsurpassed, if not unequalled, in the history of man. Eeaders must, however, invest them with their various national associations, according to history, as Shak- spere gives little assistance in this respect. It has been among the intellectual triumphs of 48 BRITISH POWER AND THOUGHT recent years to associate his plays with every proper or likely surrounding. Dress and scenery have been more strictly attended to than ever in theatrical representation, and in many respects the spirit of the great poet seems more thoroughly understood than ever before. But while these pleasing accessories prove the increasing knowledge of a more enlightened period, Shakspere's original genius, like that of Homer, remains altogether unrivalled, despite the many disadvantages and comparative ignorance of his times. The recent improvement in the dramatic art has been rather in the adornment and learned explanation of departed genius, than in rivalry of original merit. Likewise in the best editions of standard works the genius and wisdom of \lpriters in former times are now presented to a vastly increas- ing world of readers, with the additional information afforded by the resources of the present age. Thus the present period seems to furnish appreciation rather than competition. The chief musical composers, painters, and poets were more widely known, admired, and explained than ever towards the close of the nineteenth century, while the productions of their original genius remain unapproached in intrinsic value. In the increasing admiration of a better-educated world their works BRITISH POWER AND THOUaHT 49 somewhat resemble precious jewels, in new and gorgeous settings, while no actual competitors in producing works of equal value appear, despite all the encouragement and opportunities of a more enlightened time. In the case of music alone, an art which Shakspere evidently both loved and esteemed, the last two or three centuries have probably eclipsed others in its excellence as well as appreciation. ' Were it not for music we might in these days say, the beautiful is dead. Music seems to be the only means of creating the beautiful, in which we not only equal, but in all probability greatly excel, the originals. The music of modern Europe ranks with the transcendent creations of human genius.' ^ Yet Shakspere may be rather mistaken in deeming love of music opposed to rebellious feelings, or not common among revolutionists, when he writes : ^ The man that hath no music in himself, Nor is not moved with concord of sweet sounds, Is fit for treasons, stratagems and spoils. Let no such man be trusted. These celebrated lines are sometimes quoted as if expressing Shakspere's own opinion of music and of unmusical people ; yet it is certain that some of the ' Disraeli's Life of Bentinck, ch. xxiv. 2 Merchant of Venice, Aot v. 50 BRITISH POWEE AND THOUGHT best and wisest men never cared for music. It should be observed, therefore, that Shakspere does not ascribe these words to a profound sage, or one capable of knowing much about human character. They are spoken by Lorenzo, a fanciful young Italian lover, of much mental refinement certainly, but by no means a man of the world, or one who ' knows all qualities with a learned spirit of human dealings.' Lorenzo may express his own ideas truly enough, but they are not proved to be those of Shakspere himself. During recent years in France, and in Ireland especially, the attraction of music has usually been devoted to encourage and inspire revolutionary ideas. It would, perhaps, be hard to estimate the great influence such a song as the ' Marseillaise ' for instance, and some Irish melodies have had in animating the French and Irish against monarchical or British authority. As a general rule in modern times, to which ' God save the Queen ' is among the exceptions, musical influence has been, at least among the French and the Irish, more in favour of revolution than of existing government. Men in power, with military and legislative resources to control, are less likely to appeal to sensational influences than ardent revolutionists, whose chief hope is to arouse popular sympathy by such incen- BRITISH PO"\VER AND THOUGHT 51 tives. Britain, perhaps, may be rather an exception to this rule. The National Anthem and ' Eule Britannia,' with other patriotic songs, have always been most popular, and alike inspire attachment to British monarchy. That Shakspere was himself a steady monarchist there cannot be a doubt. The brave, unfortunate rebel Jack Cade, for instance, slain when half-starved and almost incapable of resistance, Shakspere describes without sympathy, while in the play of Henry VIII. that extraordinary monarch is certainly made the best of in every way. All his better qualities are shown and praised, the others, though not exactly denied, seem yet carefully concealed. Even King John, despite his odious character, is fairly enough described in the earlier part of the play, and made an object of compassion at its close. Despite his tyrannical and unfortunate reign, which might in later days have aroused re- publican feelings or sympathies, Shakspere encourages nothing of the sort. He invests the young heir to the Crown, Prince Henry, with every pleasing, attractive quality; and the play ends, leaving this youthful prince surrounded by loyal subjects vowing faithful allegiance, and the monarchical spirit as strong as ever in England, which was evidently the historical fact. a 2 52 BRITISH POWER AKD THOUGHT Shakspere in his Greek and Eoman plays presents a remarkable contrast to French writers on the same or similar subjects, to which Maeaulay draws special attention, much preferring his natural descriptions of men and women to their formal re- presentation by French poets or play-writers. The high-sounding lines of Corneille and Eacine describe in majestic style classic characters or events, yet they seem more stately than natural. But Shakspere presents Greeks and Eomans like real life, as if he had either known them or had derived information from acquaintances. His English historical plays are perhaps the most useful. They combine the teach- ings of reality with the charm and enlightenment of imagination, without any prejudice. It is rather difficult to separate properly the purely historical from the legendary plays, most of which had probably some foundation, though not verified by actual evi- dence. ' Macbeth,' especially, has strong claims to be considered a historical play. Its leading facts are confirmed by Scottish history. Glamis Castle and Dunsinane Hill are shown to this day. King Duncan was really slain by his general and relative Macbeth, who after suppressing a revolt against his sovereign, was told by fortune-tellers, or supposed witches, that he would become King of Scotland. He believed this BRITISH POWER AND THOUGHT 53 news uttered by persons who at that period, and for many subsequent centuries, were often trusted and feared. Their denunciation by both the Papacy and by the chief reformers, Luther among others, shows that this strange class of people, though usually help- less old women in appearance, were dreaded and yet believed to some extent by the most learned men in the Christian world. Thus most sects agreed to persecute them, alike believing in the Scriptural injunction : ' Thou shalt not suffer a witch to live.' It was partly this prejudice that caused Joan of Arc's execution for alleged witchcraft, a deed which was not protested against by her French fellow-countrymen.' Her heroic fortitude and tried valour went for nothing in either English or French estimation when once thought guilty of witchcraft ; it was a practice which was apparently alternately encouraged and punished throughout Britain and France for a long period of time, but which in Ireland was less known, or escaped with comparative impunity. Upon the subject of witchcraft, apparently, Roman Catholics and Protestants were united in believing in its fearful and malignant power over mankind. Shakspere, in his delightful ' Midsummer Night's Dream,' introduces those pleasing, but fanciful beings, ' Hallam's Middle Ages. 54 BRITISH POWEB AND THOUGHT as they are now considered, the fairies, who, together with the far more dangerous witches, were long believed in and usually di-eaded in Britain. In his fairies, however, there is nothing to blame or to fear. They are happy, innocent, friendly to mortals, and seem only the creation of an alluring dream. But the malignity of the Scottish witches in ' Macbeth ' is fearful and implacable, yet not greater than was attributed to them in British, and more especially in Scottish, history. It is therefore not surprising that in the remote period of Macbeth's existence, belief in their superior knowledge instigated his revolt. In the tragedies of ' Hamlet' and ' King Lear ' there seems a vague historic foundation, probably trans- mitted by discredited legends, but which were likely not without some truth. Yet all historic interest in them is eclipsed by the immortal creations of Shakspere's fancy, which render them imperishable monuments of his genius. Whether supported by historic truth or not, they are proved by their enduring power to be founded on that unrivalled knowledge of human nature still acknowledged to have distinguished Shakspere above all other British writers of ancient, mediaeval, and modern times. BRITISH POWER AND THOUGHT 55 CHAPTER V Colonisation of America engages European thought and enterprise — Their re-direotion to the lands famous in history — Transfer of political and intellectual supremacy from northern and eastern lands to the north and west of Europe. The discovery of America, its European colonisa- tion, and the gradual disappearance or subjection of native inhabitants for some time directed European attention and enterprise to this new world for ad^ venture and exploration. But the nineteenth century, especially its latter half, saw the redirection, as it were, of European thought and inquiry about the most ancient countries in Asia and Africa. America has, for the most part, become quite independent of those European countries to which it owes its ruling population and Christian faith. European ambition and conquest are no longer directed to any part of that immense continent or to its numerous ■islands. This new world, full of so much to interest botanists and naturalists, has yet afforded little, if 56 BRITISH POWEE AND THOUGHT any religious or historical information to mankind. It has now, in fact, become almost a second Europe, representing Britain in parts of the north, and Spain and Portugal in the middle and south. The Eoman Catholic and Protestant faiths of their respective mother countries are openly professed, -while the vague religious ideas of the native inhabitants have almost disappeared, without apparent likelihood of revival. The redirection, therefore, of European, especially British, power and thought to the ancient lands of Asia and Africa is undisturbed either by American interference or by very formidable opposi- tion from Asiatics and Africans. The most power- ful countries at the present time, Britain, Kussia, Germany, and France, are now virtually prevalent throughout the chief lands of Asia and Africa, either directly or indirectly. Yet these European Powers are still restrained, delayed, and in many ways obstructed by their own national or political jealousies. Whether they will gradually yield to a more generous competi- tion to benefit the rest of mankind rather than merely triumph at their expense, is among the most interesting as well as important questions of this eventful time. In one of Dickens's works,^ that admirable writer ' BleaTc Souse. BRITISH POWER AND THOUGHT 57 describes a lady neglecting her family altogether, while devoting her thoughts and energies to the natives of Africa, which he wittily terms ' telescopic philanthropy.' Some people might likewise appre- hend that when so much British money and energy are devoted to distant parts of the world, home interests may be rather neglected. It must be owned that while British civilisation is extending through many parts of the distant world, the state of the home population in some places shows little signs of an adequate improvement. The dangers to modern society also are indeed changed with the times, but whether they are less formidable or indicate less moral evil than formerly, even among professing Christians, may perhaps be questioned. There is no longer highway robbery, or legalised religious persecution, or the tyranny of arbitrary power in sovereigns or in statesmen. But the peculiarly atrocious attempts of Anarchists, often men of intelligence and education, to commit murder by dynamite explosions, or by the dagger or the pistol, the frequent attempts to upset railway trains, the many fraudulent companies obtaining money by false pretences from the ignorant or trustful — all these crimes against society in the very heart of 58 BRITISH POWEE AND THOUGHT Christendom and among Christian men, have rather increased in number and in audacity during the last fifty years. It may depress philanthropic British travellers returning from distant lands, full of praise and satisfaction at beholding the benefits of British influence abroad, to yet find such an amount of crafty and cruel demoralisation at home. This spectacle is evidently one of the wonders or seeming contradictions of the present age. It is clearly a proof of an altered state of the times, in which in- creasing knowledge of other countries, the advance- ment of education, and the greater facilities for international intercourse are sometimes perverted to endanger as well as to benefit Christian society. This moral lesson, when compared by thoughtful minds with historical evidence of the past, greatly confirms the old saying that man is ever the same. It shows civilised mankind to be capable of turning all advantages of education, genius, and knowledge to the injury as well as to the benefit of the human race. The vast changes that thoughtful readers must recognise in men's history are always accompanied by unchangeable qualities in mental or in bodily condition. While subject to most of the diseases and to a similar duration of life as recorded BEITISH POWER AND THOUGHT 59 in the earlier times, the moral history of men occa- sionally shows deterioration as well as improvement in their ingenious perversion of every worldly ad- vantage to effect criminal objects. The scenes, more- over of mankind's civilisation have changed during the progress of centuries in a manner both interest- ing and instructive to historical students. As in ancient maps Britain, Eussia, France, and Germany seem barbarous and little known, we now see Babylon and Thebes alike almost in a desert. Eome is the political capital of a second-rate European Power, Athens that of a yet much smaller and more helpless little kingdom, Jerusalem a mere provincial town, and Constantinople at the disposal of European Powers whose mutual jealousies alone prevent their seizing upon it. Political power and political weakness as well as civilisation have strangely shifted their Seats of residence : London, Berlin, St. Petersburg, and Paris now wield, though with mutual suspicion or national rivalry, far more influence over the human race than was ever exercised by any Pagan empire. The jealousies of Christian nations, however, greatly delay the civilisation of mankind, which otherwise it would be in their power every year to 60 BRITISH POWEE AND THOUGHT accelerate. Christian influence of such priceless value, and which by God's government of the world seems at length within Christian power to extend everywhere, is now checked and opposed in its pro- gress by Christians themselves. This spectacle is practically new in civilised history, and rather con- tradicts than confirms its previous lessons. As in the ancient Greek proverb : ' Only the hero Ajax himself could conquer Ajax,' the beginning of this twentieth century shows the Christian Powers fearing nothing except each other. All non- Christians seem incapable of maintaining aggressive warfare. No conquest of Christian lands by them seems any longer possible. The efforts of recent European diplomatists have been devoted to check or delay the political triumph of their common faith among non-Christian nations, through the national jealousies of the chief Christian countries. In this subordination of religious ascen- dancy to political or commercial interests, European policy towards Turkey and China is a prominent instance. During recent years these two non- Christian Powers have claimed the special atten- tion of Britain, France, Eussia, and Germany, yet neither Turks nor Chinamen have the least idea of attacking Christian countries. They would BRITISH POWER AND THOUGHT 61 alike be apparently incapable of making a successful resistance to European alliance against them. The former, troubled by discontented Christian subjects, is yet enabled, or rather permitted, partly through the influence of the Mohammedan subjects of Britain and of Eussia, to maintain the semblance at least of national independence. The latter also apparently owe their preserved independence to the constant rivalry of the Christian nations, who seem to have the power and would otherwise have the inclination to destroy it. Their capital, Pekin, for so long almost inaccessible to European travellers, is now becoming a special object of attention to Britain, France, Russia, and Germany. The independence of China for some time past seems chiefly due to their mutual jealousy, yet they every year approach it nearer and nearer. This national jealousy or apprehension still follows the progress of Christian nations like an evil spirit. It is practically an o>-' structive power by which religious triumphs so long prayed for throughout Christendom, and now for the first time in the power of Christian nations, are still delayed by its paramount influence. Eeligious minds which recognise or believe in the Divine government of mankind during the passing centuries, must perceive 62 BRITISH POWER AND THOUGHT that the political ascendancy of Christianity is making far more progress than its doctrinal extension ; Chris- tians prevail, and are everywhere prevailing, while their faith among other nations seems, comparatively speaking, almost at a standstill. The former make sure and permanent, the latter slow and retarded, progress. Christian doctrines in some respects appear as much disputed about as ever by people who alike claim to understand them. It is now proved for the first time almost in history that intelligent non-Christians — Jews, Mohammedans, and Parsees— when no longer embittered by persecution, but friendly and loyal to British rule, with every advantage of Christian inter- course and knowledge, yet on the subject of religion remain true to the faiths of their remote ancestry. During the nineteenth century, especially towards its close, the development of Christian rule, direct or indirect, has been throughout Asia and Africa greater than ever, and seems still on the increase. This is the more surprising when we remember that during that time nearly all the Christian Powers have been at war with each other. Yet these de- structive contests were never taken advantage of by either Asiatics or Africans. They were either unable BRITISH POWER AND THOUGHT 63 or perhaps too ignorant to avail themselves of any opportunity to resist or delay the extension of Euro- pean power. The days of Mohammedan champions had to all appearance vanished at the very time when the political ascendancy of their faith might have been perhaps in some countries restored. The wars of Napoleon I. had united most Europeans against the French. They had also the singular effect of allying together Eoman Catholic Austrians and Spaniards, Protestant British and Germans, and Eussian members of the Greek Church against one Eoman Catholic nation. The Papacy itself withheld all sympathy in the contest from the French, owing to its dislike to Napoleon I. This most wonderful conqueror of modern times, though always a professed Eoman Catholic, had apparently no special regard for any particular form of Chris- tianity. Disapproved politically from first to last by the Catholic clergy, even by those of his own nation, his final defeat by united Catholics and non-Catholics was therefore no defeat of Catholicism. In fact. Napoleon's whole career had little effect on the in- terests of any religion or form of religion. All his main objects and motives were entirely political. Ever since his fall, despite revolutions or civil wars 64 BRITISH POWER AND THOUaHT in most Christian countries, European power and influence have steadily advanced both in Asia and in Africa. France, when ruled by the great Napoleon's nephew, Napoleon III., was always friendly to Britain, though at war during his strange career with Eussia, Austria, and lastly with Prussia. America, instead of taking much part in the politics of the Old World, was, however, seriously disturbed by its own internal dissensions in the last century, Mexico and South America alike underwent revolutions ending in the maintenance of independent republics, while the United StateSj despite the practical wisdom of its shrewd people, became, for a short time, the scene of a desperate civil war, which, however, left their Eepublic unchanged. During these contests in America, whether in north or south, no other part of the world interfered except in Mexico, where the French tried to establish an empire under an Austrian Prince, in the place of a Eepublic. This project, however, failed, the Eepublic was upheld, and is still retained. No European country was affected by the results of the domestic troubles in America. The last revolt in the island of Cuba against the Spaniards, ending in its partial annexa- tion to the United States, has had the effect ap- BRITISH POWER AND THOUGHT 65 parently of increasing the friendship between Britain and that Eepublic. The tendency of these American wars seems rather to deter the New World from active interference in the affairs of the Old, which during the last ten years appear more and more complicated. The triumphs of Europe seem certainly extending in almost every direction throughout Asia and Africa, but chiefly in countries most remote from the Euro- pean capitals. Though Eussia in territorial expan- sion is almost unrivalled, her boundaries now extend- ing from Sweden to the north of China, the prevalence of British authority is yet more remarkable, owing to the greater variety of races, religions, and countries which acknowledge its influence. 66 BRITISH POWER AND THOUGHT CHAPTER VI Increase of literary study througbont Britain— Cultivation of the classics by British statesmen — Increased care and attention devoted to the representation of Shakspere's plays. In its progress the nineteenth century has to all appearance developed the wonders and the resources of art, science, and literature to an unprecedented extent. In scientific discoveries, it may be called unrivalled in the variety as well as value and utility of its inventions, and in the increasing safety, extension, and importance of their practical use. In art and literature it can hardly be denied that the present time is distinguished rather by appreciation of the past than by its superiority. In painting and literature, whether in prose or poetry, no artists have for many years appeared surpassing those who have gone before. This seems to be an age when admiration for excellence is more extended and more learned than during the existence of the most able, gifted, or accomplished men that the world has yet BRITISH POWER AND THOUGHT 07 seen. The classics in the chief European colleges, the works of Shakspere, Dante, Cervantes, and Goethe, as well as those of more recent writers, are now published and republished in better form, with the instructive remarks or prefaces of an admiring, and enlightened, rather than of a competing posterity. In real merits they possess no living rivals. In music, as in painting, the inferiority of living artists is only too evident. Eaphael, Michael Angelo, Mozart, Beethoven, Rossini, and Verdi have not been surpassed by recent successors in the noble arts in which they so eminently excelled, while in public estimation their works in many cases rise rather than diminish in value through the progress of time. In Britain the appreciation of Shakspere's worJi.s seems to justify the words of Dr. Johnson, that tht y receive new honours at every transmission among successive generations. His works, whether intro- ducing classic or English history, or inventing tales of country life, prove that wonderful knowledge of the human character in which he has never been equalled, at least in Britain, by any other writer. They seem to appeal specially to Englishmen, and are perhaps more suited to his successors than to persons of his own time, or to their predecessors. F 2 68 BRITISH POWER AND THOUGHT In the classic plays he shows a keen appreciation of those Greek or Eoman characters, scenes, and sen- timents which have so permanently interested the educated classes in Europe. Shakspere evidently views the men and the history of Pagan Eome with far more interest than the ancient history of his own country. The resemblance between Eome and London in their proud predominance over foreign nations he forcibly alludes to, when comparing the return of the warlike English King Henry V. from France to London to that of victorious Eoman Emperors to 'their capital : But now behold, In the quick forge and working-house of thought, How London doth pour out her citizens ! The mayor, and all his brethren in best sort, — Like to the senators of the antique Eome, With the plebeians swarming at their heels, — Go forth, and fetch their conquering Caesar in.' Again, in ' Henry IV.,' Falstaff thus compares his own perhaps doubtful valour to that of Julius CsBsar : ' I may justly say with the hook-nosed fellow of Eome, I came, saw, and overcame.' In ' King Lear,' strange to say, the classic deities ' Henry V. Act v. BRITISH POWER AND THOUGHT 69 are also appealed to instead of the ancient gods of Britain : Lear : Now by Apollo ! Kent : Now by Apollo, king, Thou swear'st thy gods in vain.' Sir Walter Scott mentions the ancient gods of Britain in ' Ivanhoe ' and other novels, but Shakspere, though he must have heard about them, prefers allusions to the classic mythology. Greece, Eome, and Judea were evidently the objects of special interest and admiration throughout England in Shakspere's time, to the comparative exclusion of the religious ideas and historic traditions of other lands. The history of Judea, or its personages, he never notices. This most interesting country, whose history was to a great extent contem- poraneous with the histories of Greece and Eome, seems to have been generally abandoned to the examination and reverence of theologians. Judea was the special dominion of European religious belief or confidence. While Jewish synagogues and Christian churches take their inspiration almost exclusively from it, examining with most reverent attention its most uncertain or vague traditions, ' King Lear, Act i. 70 BRITISH POWER AND THOUGHT the histories and general literature of Greece and Rome are the special studies of most cultivated lay- men in civilised lands. It seems the fate of the educated world to this day to found its religious belief, literary taste, and to some extent its legisla- tive principles upon these three most important countries, Greece, Italy, and Judea. The constant study at schools and colleges of the higher class throughout modern Europe is largely devoted to the histories, philosophy, poetry, or legislation furnished by the greatest men of Greece and Home. An interesting proof of the lasting esteem for Greek literature in Britain was the close attention devoted to it by two of the most eminent English prime ministers of the nineteenth century. Lord Derby in his careful translation of Homer's ' Iliad,' and Mr. Gladstone in his studies on Homer and the ' Juventus Mundi,' alike show what real delight they found in subjects sometimes thought to only interest learned Echolars, partly from professional interests. These English statesmen, representing the two opposing political parties in Britain, occupied their leisure in rivalling each other in trying to examine and elucidate the noblest Greek poet of ancient times. BRITISH POWER AND THOUGHT 71 The studious examination of Homer, instead of being the laborious study of impatient youths, was to them evidently a welcome change from the troublesome or arduous politics of the day. The Sunday teaching, however, throughout Britain, is almost exclusively derived historically and morally from Judea. The Jews, who, as Newman observes, had the ' sole custody ' of ancient religious history, are therefore always trusted by Christians in theological and historic traditions till the time of Jesus. But after His death nearly all knowledge of, or interest in, subsequent Jewish history seems purposely excluded from Christian study. The persecution and final triumph of Christianity over European Paganisms, and the subsequent establish- ment of Christian empires and kingdoms to the present date form the usual course of modern Christian education. The ancestral ideas and legends, as well as the ancient faiths of Europe, have totally vanished ; that of Odin has never been much elucidated. Few subsequent British writers try to rescue it from the oblivion into which it has sunk by the national will or consent of succeeding generations. In ' Troilus and Cressida,' as in ' Timon of Athens ' Shakspere describes the Greeks, 72 BRITISH POWEE AND THOUGHT and in ' Julius Caesar ' and ' Antony and Cleopatra ' the Eomans of antiquity, as if starting again into real life. These tragedies, though with few local allusions, yet by their profound knowledge of man- kind, represent to classical scholars the personages of ancient days with far naore vivid correctness than has ever been accomplished by any contemporary or subsequent writer. In ' Troilus and Cressida ' we find in poetical English description Greek and Trojan heroes celebrated in Homeir's ' Iliad ' and ' Odyssey.' But for their lifelike delineation Shak- spere's own genius and wonderful knowledge of human nature endowed him with yet more power. Unlike the formal, measured language of the French writers Corneille and Racine in their classic plays, the Greeks and Eomans of Shakspere speak naturally, and resemble sketches from real life. ' Troilus and Cressida ' alludes to the wonderful siege of Troy, per- haps the first historical event transmitted by poetry. The genius of Homer in describing it, instead of losing interest through time, has about the middle, or rather towards the end, of the nineteenth century engrossed the attention and amused the leisure of English statesmen. This fact is one among many other instances of the lasting attraction BRITISH POWER AND THOUGHT 73 which classic literature still has for Europeans, early education, when not made odious, as in the cases of Cowper, Dickens, and Thackeray, retaining a delightful influence over many distinguished English politicians, historians, and novelists of the nineteenth century. This different result of similar educational training among contemporaries appears evident from their own admissions. The attraction yet found in ancient classic literature is the more surprising at a time when not only modern literature, but all the knowledge obtainable through foreign exploration or travelling, is more accessible than ever to British scholars. Yet despite such com- paratively lively influences, the deep-rooted esteem for the classic literature of Pagan Greece and Eome never lost its hold on Mr. Gladstone, the late Lord Derby, the first Lord Lytton, and last but not least Lord Macaulay. These eminent men alike played a part in British political as well as literary history, while their memorable predecessors, Sir Walter Scott and Lord Byron, found more pleasure in tales of the Middle Ages. In the poems of ' Faliero ' and ' The Foscari ' Byron shows his interest in Italian mediaeval history, while the Waverley novels illustrate with a power 74 BRITISH POWER AND THOUGHT never shown before or since parts of British history during civilised and half-civilised times. Though both Scott and Byron occasionally allude to the classics, usually with admiration, yet more recent writers evince more knowledge of and interest in them, owing, perhaps, to the increasing discoveries made in the classic lands of antiquity during very recent years. In theatrical representation Shak- spere's historic plays, as well as those of some other writers, have been of late years produced, in London especially, with far more attention to their histori- cal truth, and with an exactness of detail un- known in former days. Owing to the vast increase of travelling, exploration, and studious research among western Europeans, the histories and antiquities of former ages in foreign lands have been greatly elucidated among the British public. Italy, Greece, Egypt, and Assyria during the nineteenth century were examined or traversed by English people to a greater extent than ever. The two latter countries, though still under Mohammedan rule, now reveal to scientific Europeans their ancient wonders to an extent which may well astonish their political rulers. Judea is also more frequently and safely examined by European Christians than was BRITISH POWEE AND THOUGHT 75 ever possible before. Greece, though only a small yet independent kingdom protected by European Powers, to whose help, early in the nineteenth century, it owed its rescue from Turkish rule, has latterly been discouraged by its former friends from attempting to further weaken the Turks, whose authority over a few Christian provinces is preserved and acknowledged by the Christian Powers. The Turkish Empire specially claims the notice of classical students in its present extraordinary condition, which can only be explained by politicians. While Judea is the source of ancient religious history, Greece furnishes the most valued poetry and philosophy ever transmitted through the lapse of time to civilised Europe, which to this day considers Greek and Roman literature the chief foundations of secular education. Shakspere in his Greek and Eoman plays was probably more interesting to English and to German students than to Greeks and Italians of his time or since. Their mediaeval as well as modern history was from different causes rather unfavourable to the examination of their Pagan ancestry. The Greeks, for a long period, were under Turkish rule, and their most educated men were more absorbed in the Christian divisions of the Greek and Latin Churches 76 BRITISH POWER AND THOUGHT than in studying the poetic or philosophic beauties of their remote ancestral faith. Italy was for centu- ries a land divided between its religious supremacy over Christendom and its artistic cultivation or de- velopment of music and painting. While Eome itself exchanged territorial for religious supremacy over most civilised lands, Italy, as a political power, had little influence throughout mediiBval or modern history. Britain and Germany, almost abandoning their ancient histories in remote Pagan times, alike studied classic history with peculiar interest, attention, and real delight. The French, while mentioning the classics in stately, grandiloquent poetry, and also in the writings of Fenelon, EoUin, and Bossuet, seem hardly to rival the British in the care or the accuracy of historical examination. BRITISH POWER AND THOUGHT 77 CHAPTER VII British triumphs chiefly in Asia and Africa — Politieal rivalry of European Powers after the fall of Napoleon — Increased con- fidence between Christian rulers and their Mohammedan subjects — Permanent value of Gibbon's Roman history acknowledged at the present time. The position of Britain in the conquest and civil- isation of the modern world is a subject of alike historical interest and importance. Her conquests in Europe, however, are few. After losing all French possessions, she retains the Spanish fortress of Gibraltar and the island of Malta, while restoring the Ionian Isles to Greece, after a brief rule over them, and has peacefully acquired the island of Cyprus. It is in Asia and Africa — Asia especially — where British power is stronger and more extensive than in any other part of the world. India is her chief and most important possession. This large and interest- ing country is perhaps the most successful proof of the wisdom and justice of British authority. Within its vast boundary Mohammedans, Brahmins, Buddhists in 78 BRITISH POWER AND THOUGHT Ceylon, and Parsees in or about Bombay, live together in peace, though at times protected from each other by the tolerant wisdom of Christian government. Despite occasional outbursts of local discontent, it seems evident that British supremacy is on the whole popular throughout India. During the South African war of the Boers against the British, a truly lamentable contest, the population of India avowedly showed no sympathy with the former. Throughout Egypt, and some of its adjacent countries, the death of the fanatical Khalifa, and the increasing friendship between the Egyptian ruler, the Khedive, and the British, promise, at least for a time, the confirmation of British indirect influence or virtual authority. The people of the United States, chiefly of British descent, have recently shown an increasing friendship for Britain, while in the far east of Asia the spirited Japanese energetically imitate Europeans, besides cultivating their friendship in every possible way. The advance of the Eussians in eastern Asia, though they are fellow-Europeans and fellow-Chris- tians, is unfortunately still regarded with apprehen- sion or jealousy by the British. In a spirit almost the reverse of the Crusades, wheTi British, French, BRITISH POWER AND THOUGHT 79 and Austrians were allied against the Mohammedans in Syria, their modern successors in wielding European power regard each other's Asiatic triumphs with a hostility greatly opposed to the progress of civilisa- tion. Thus in the extreme point of eastern Asia, the opening of this twentieth century sees British, French, Russians, and Germans apprehensively watching, if not intriguing against, one another. Even the Empire of China, still hostile to all Euro- peans, or ' foreign devils,' as Chinamen indiscriminately call them, might be overcome and ultimately civilised if these Christian Powers were in sincere alliance for the good of mankind. Some faint signs of such an alliance are at length appearing, owing chiefly to the implacable, though often concealed, hatred of the Chinese to every foreign nation without dis- tinction. For this reason it may perhaps be hoped that their inveterate barbarism may yet effect its own destruction by uniting Christian Powers against it, who otherwise would continue divided by mutual jealousies. The Turks have long attracted European interest, and continue to do so, though in a most peculiar manner. Unlike the remote Chinese, the Turks have long ruled as well as intrigued against Christians, besides allying themselves with them in 80 BRITISH POWER AND THOUGHT the Crimean war against other Christians. The position, however, of this singular and to some ex- tent formidable Mohammedan nation is now greatly changed by recent events, and by the unforeseen events in men's feelings caused by the strange history of the nineteenth century. The numbers as well as the proved loyalty of many Mohammedan subjects to the British and to the Eussians have greatly inclined these Christian Powers to discourage further Christian revolt against the Turks, and to view the latter with apparent cordiality, as well as to support their rule over discontented Christians. Yet all political power and aggressive strength, if not inclination, seem withdrawn from every Mohammedan and non-Christian power ; for Chinese enmity, though apparently implacable, is yet entirely devoted to defending their own country from European know- ledge and interference. It can hardly be denied by candid, well-informed foreigners that Britain for many years has possessed more direct or indirect influence throughout distant countries than any other Power can claim. The French, since the fall of Napoleon III., have made no progress in Europe, but retain Algiers, and seem extending or confirming their authority in BRITISH POWEE AND THOUGHT 81 Cochin China. The steady land advance of the Eussians in Asia, though for a short time delayed by the Crimean war, continues to make progress, to which the enterprising Siberian railway, just completed, will doubtless be a very effectual aid. The Germans also have taken recently an interest and acquired an influence in distant countries, which they hardly took before, and which seem to promise new and impor- tant results. But the British in all parts of the world have hitherto maintained an influence which well deserves special credit and admiration among those interested in the progress of civilisation. The many causes which have gradually led this small, isolated European nation to attain so noble a position among mankind are indeed well worth most careful, as well as cool and impartial, examination. In the forefront of these causes stands the beneficial as well as the instructive influence of British literature. In this grand department of human intelligence, British historians, philosophers, poets, and novelists have alike distinguished themselves in the service of man- kind generally, instead of being exclusively devoted to the interests of their own nation. Perhaps among English historians. Gibbon has been, on the whole, the most useful and instructive in examining the G 82 BRITISH POWEE AND THOUGHT historical progress of the civilised world during, shortly before, and shortly after the fall of the Eoman Empire. His most valuable history, a monument indeed of profound learning, deep research, and extended inquiry, the British public has for many years con- sulted as a historical referee. The period which this grand work chiefly describes is when the vast Eoman empire in its northern, western, and part of its south- eastern dominions gradually exchanged the faiths of Odin and of Jupiter for Christianity. The falling empire, with its extensive foreign conquests, its glorious past history, its generally speaking benefi- cent rule over millions of distant subjects, its wise legislation and imperishable literature, evidently had a peculiar charm for Gibbon's mind. The point where this eminent historian is most distrusted by Christian readers — perhaps the only point — is his apparent indifference, if not regret, about the replace- ment of Paganism by Christianity. Without intimating any religious confidence in the former, his natural dislike to the intolerance of Christians when first in political power shocks his philianthropic mind when compared with the tolerant rule of the Romans. He often sneers at Christianity, BRITISH POWER AND THOUGHT 83 thereby incurring Lord Byron's sarcastic remark of ' Sapping a solemn Creed with solemn sneer, The lord of irony, that master spell.' Gibbon therefore in- curred, and to a less extent still iucurs, the grave censure of some devout Christian readers. For Mohammed and his faith he shows both interest and admiration, and is mentioned by recent Mohammedan writers with respect and even some confidence, while his views on Christianity, or rather on the intoler- ance of its believers, would at the present day encounter less disapprobation than formerly from many Christian readers. Gibbon himself seems fully imbued with those principles of honour, justice, and real benevolence which Jesus enjoined, though many of His followers for centuries disobeyed them, in legislative enactment, when in political power. Gibbon's vast learning and wide research, his keen, practical shrewdness in examining all countries, as well as people, in any way connected with the Eoman Empire, make his grQat history an invaluable study. If such historic writers as he, Hume, and Robertson examined Roman, English, and Scottish history with an ability and learning whi<;h made their works of permanent value, the two greatest of British poets, Shakspere and Milton, also Q 2 84 BRITISH POWER AND THOUGHT enlightened their fortunate nation in a more attrac- tive, and perhaps not less instructive, manner. These poets were evidently earnest Christians. They show nothing of that doubting, sceptical spirit indicated by Hume and Gibbon, though not by Eobertson ; yet the scepticism of both historians is hardly viewed by modern religious readers with the same disapproval shown by most devout Christians of their period. The ability of these two writers is properly appreciated, and their works have been issued in improved editions. In most of their historical statements they are considerably relied upon to this day. But their opinions about Chris- tianity are usually repudiated by the majority of British readers. On this grand subject the learning, scholarship, and talents of these eminent historians lose their power among a majority of their fellow- countrymen. Christianity, despite the firm here- ditary opposition of the Jewish race, among whom it arose, despite the sneers, philosophic doubts, or calm incredulity of some learned virtuous men born and educated in the faith, survives in territorial extension and political power to a greater extent than ever. It is practically the ruling religion of the modern civilised world. No fair-minded un- BRITISH POWER AND THOUGHT 85 believer can deny its extraordinary and increasing ascendancy throughout not only Europe, but other parts of the known world. This ascendancy is not so much the result of conversion as of conquest and subsequent colonisation by Christian races. As a rule Asiatics and Africans either retain ancestral faiths or seem stolidly indifferent to the subject of religious conversion. Yet wherever Europeans rule or inhabit Christianity accompanies them. This is evident throughout the vast continent of America and in its islands, where the divided Christianity of Europe — Protestantism and Eoman Catholicism — reappears among the British-descended colonists in the north, and those of Spain and Portugal in the south. In each case triumphant and ruling colonists have brought with them their differing forms of the same faith. America therefore has done little or nothing to increase religious knowledge, and the same may be said of the greater part of Africa and of Australia. The two powerful religions of mediaeval times, Christianity and Mohammedanism, now prevail in political power without a rival. Com- pletely replacing the ancient faiths of Jupiter, of Odin, and of Arabia, these rival offshoots from the Jewish faith are now supreme in political influence. 86 BRITISH PO\VER AND THOUGHT and no new faith has arisen to dispute or delay their territorial influence. In the peculiar progress of religion human history may be studied with special wonder and interest. The earliest faiths which mankind seemed capable of understanding, and which still exist, are those of Judaism and Parseeism. The fanciful, in some respects attractive, faith of Jupiter, while animating or inspiring some of the noblest poetry ever known, has vanished alto- gether from those lands where once its poetical ideas were believed. The sterner, perhaps more gloomy, faith of Odin has likewise utterly disappeared. Judaism, their ancient contemporary, however, sur- vives, and to this day presents the extraordinary spectacle of a faith politically powerless yet doctri- nally firm, if not invincible ; deprived indeed of a national home, yet surviving in peaceful triumph in almost every civilised country. Though politically subject to Christians and to Mohammedans, it steadily maintains its hold on the minds of millions, notwith- standing its subjection, without hitherto inspiring its votaries with any very definite idea of recovering political or national independence. During many centuries Judaism has now been politically ruled by Christians and by Mohammedans, yet has remained EETTISH POWER AND THOUGHT 87 in doctrinal security, despite its national subjec- tion. Though Christianity and Mohammedanism may claim at present to share supreme or indirect ascendancy over a majority of mankind, their supremacy has hardly produced the results that might have been expected. Throughout the last century, as well as in the beginning of this, the fearful calamity of war has occurred chiefly between nations professing the Religion of Peace. The wars of the two Napoleons, involving the full military power of the French, the British and Eussian wars in Asia, the wars of the Prussians against the Austrians, and of the latter against the Italians, besides revolutions in Spain and the American Civil war, were waged by opposing Christians without non-Christian allies, except in the Crimea. This last contest in its avowed object was a complete contrast to any previous war in Christian history. British, French, and Italians warred against Eussian fellow-Christians to preserve Turkish Mohammedan rule over Armenian and Greek Christian subjects. This object was accomplished, but whether it will promote the cause of civilisation or the welfare of subjected millions of Christians remains to be proved. 88 EEITISH POWER AND THOUGHT CHAPTEE VIII Warlike tendencies of naodern Christian nations — Comparatively weak state of the non-Christian world — Asia and Africa become more and more subject to Christian power and influence. It is probable that warfare between Christian nations during the last century may have equalled in national importance, as well as ux loss of life and treasure, all contests between non-Christians in any part of the world. Yet the political power of Christians remains proof aga,inst every disaster, for though Christian empires and kingdoms have warred against each other with unprecedented violence throughout the nineteenth century, no advantage of their hostility was taken by non-Christian nations. The Christian Powers, after these wars with each other, resumed their Asiatic or African conquests and extension, which the native races were usually unable to resist. No non-Christian nation has produced for many years a success- ful champion, though some brave leaders have appeared. It would seem as if they were all BRITISH POWEE AND THOUGHT 89 fated more or less to fall under the rule or the influence of Christians. At present the spectacle shown in parts of Asia and Africa is that of European Christians intriguing or warring against each other, but no longer seriously endangered, though occasionally opposed, by non- Christians. The warlike energy and inclination of European Christians seem to increase, though in a time of European peace. In Britain, and throughout the Continent, military preparations, knowledge, inven- tions, and practical skill seem more and more general, while the popularity of all pertaining to military life is undeniable, and seems even greater than during the middle of the last century. Unless some energetic non-Christian champion should arise unexpectedly, there seems nothing at present to delay the increasing extension of Christian political power. Among Christian nations, the British are certainly foremost, who in their varied powers as legislators or rulers at home, abroad, and throughout their vast colonies, recall in practical success the former supremacy of the Eomans. In many respects the British Empire seems to have gained the heritage bequeathed by the teaching and example of the Eomans. The Eussians 90 BRITISH POWER AND THOUGHT and French may also lay some claim to this distinc- tion, and apparently somewhat rival the British in their capacity for ruling various nations of differing religions, and in distant parts of the world. Milton's noble description of the various subjected nations loyally visiting Eome, the great capital of ancient civi- lisation, rather recalls the spectacle which recent years have shown both in London and St. Petersburg. The city which thou seest no other deem Than great and glorious Rome, queen of the Earth, So far renown'd, and with the spoila enrich'd Of nations. . . . All nations now to Eome obedience pay.' The triumphs of modern Europe seem alike increasing and permanent. While Spain and Portugal were the chief conquerors of the New World, the gradual submission of Asiatic and African races to Britain, Eussia, and France apparently completes the picture shown in ancient Roman and in modern history, of European pre- eminence over the nations of the earth. London, Paris, and St. Petersburg now receive the homage loyally displayed of an immense variety of subjects no longer aspiring to regain ancestral freedom or independence, but apparently reconciled to the ' Paradise Regained, Bk. iv. BRITISH POWER AND THOUGHT 91 political authority of British, French, or Eussian rulers. Such proofs of the political obedience of differing non-Christian nations to Christian Govern- ments is one of the most remarkable spectacles presented by recent history. It may surely be assumed that never was Christian supremacy so prevalent or so popular as at the beginning of this twentieth century. Yet it cannot be said that acceptance of the Christian faith accompanies the extraordinary triumphs of its votaries, as might have been expected. In fact, subjected, even loyal, Mohammedans and other non-Christians seem as de- voted to their ancestral religions as when they were established in political power. It is yet more sur- prising that Judaism, so long subjected to Christian and Mohammedan Governments, shows no sign of yielding to the faiths of its rulers. Utterly unmoved in religious opinion by the enduring ascendancy of Christians and Mohammedans, Judaism still defies both, while its votaries seldom argue with either. Politically, Christianity and Mohammedanism now rule or influence the greater part of the entire world, yet Judaism, their common religious founda- tion, on whose ancient history these triumphant faiths alike depend, remains firm and incredulous 92 BRITISH POWER AND THOUGHT as ever. No later faith than Mohamraedanism, historically speaking, has hitherto arisen to attract the notice or claim the reverence of the religious world. It and Christianity, each relying on Judaism, which disavows them alike and for similar reasons, prevail more and more over mankind in actual authority, without encountering, or apparently apprehending, any religious rival or successor. Britain, Eussia, and France, belonging to different forms of Christianity, now govern or materially influence the votaries of nearly all other reli- gions, without establishing or trying to establish Christianity among them. Political power seems more than ever separated from religious agreement, and Judaism, the historical foe of Christianity and Mohammedanism, still exists in most lands profess- ing those religions, and yet is neither converted nor converting. The present state of the religious world proves its thorough independence of political power, when doctrinal differences, at length free from persecution, yet show no sign whatever of recon- cilement. Christianity undoubtedly prevails more extensively than ever in political rule or influence in almost every country. Yet non-Christian opinions in great variety peacefully exist, while the historical BRITISH POWER AND THOUGHT 93 denial of the Jews, the partial distrust of Moham- medans, and the utter ignorance of Christianity evinced by other existing faiths no longer incur legal oppression. All these various opinions or ideas about religion were never so free from legal persecu- tion as at the present time, and yet their differing votaries do not indulge in as much religious argu- ment or discussion as might well be expected when the fiery zeal for conversions in former times is recalled by historical study. Of all modern nations who have encouraged, and still encourage, this freedom of religious thought, the British appear the most successful. To them seem descended in his- torical course much of the legislative power, the classic taste, and the ruling ability of the Pagan Eomans. This grand combination of the highest advantages, as well as qualities, the position of Britain proves her to really possess. The conquests of no other nation seem to produce such success- ful results, or on so vast a scale, as those of the British and of the Eussians. Eecently, however, the Germans seem more inclined, if not more able, to rival them in the arduous, yet practically glori- ous task of ruling or influencing foreign nations, in which achievement British success is specially re- 94 BRITISH POWER AND THOUGHT markable. Like the Eomans, who rarely introduced their faith at the point of the sword among their various subjects, as Mohammedans were accused of doing, the British now rule not only Jews but Mohammedans, Parsees, Brahmins, and Buddhists with indiscriminate justice. At present Britain occupies the proud position of a Power which politically rules the votaries of almost every known religion with practical impartiality. The religious history of Britain may in itself partly explain her signal pre-eminence in governing nations of so many different religions with a success never equalled except by the Eomans in former times. England's domestic history, when examined in connection with her foreign career, conquests, and settlements, forms a study of peculiar interest. Scotland and Ireland were each for some years at war with her, the former being a separate kingdom for many years, the latter divided between English rule and that of native chiefs, who were practically independent of her authority. Both these countries became united with England, gradually acquiring the same language, and for many years acknowledging the same form of Christianity. All these three countries, without apparently much regret, abandoned their ancient Paganisms and embraced Christianity with BEITISH POWER AND THOUGHT 95 about the same unanimity. The political rule of the Eomans, for a short time absolute in England, though little known in Scotland and Ireland, seems not to have implanted the classic Paganism in any of these three countries. In religious belief they alike became Christian with equal sincerity, and none of them more than the other evinced any desire to return to their ancestral faith. The new victorious religion gradually supplanted every other faith in Europe. Its success in Asia and in Africa was comparatively slow and unimportant, but Europe was evidently its adopted country. The Asiatic and African Christians, Armenians, Nes- torians, Maronites, Copts, and others, became politically subjected, and apparently made few if any efforts to spread Christianity among other nations. But in Europe the rejected faith of Judea found its natural home. Unlike the implacable hostility of Jerusalem to Christianity, the Pagan cities of Athens, Eome, and Byzantium, so long the chief capitals of the Pagan world, became devoted to the new faith. They alike completely abandoned the fanciful Paganism of their former times, which, however, to this day is studied with delight, though without belief, in beautiful poetry and philosophic prose by most European scholars. But little, if 96 BRITISH POWEE AND THOUGHT anything, survives in the Paganism of northern Europe, the singular faith of Odin, to instruct or even to interest its Christian replacers. Britain and Ireland, in common with Europe generally, utterly abandoned ancestral faiths, believing Christianity the only true one, while regarding the classic mythology as a poetical study, devoid of religious truth or information. Britain, since its conversion to Christianity, remained an independent nation, yet of comparatively slight importance. Nothing, Macaulay observes, in her early history indicated her future greatness. The vast ascendancy of the British throughout the world could scarcely have been predicted, or thought likely, by students of ancient history. The British, deriving little learn- ing or assistance from their remote ancestry, have gradually attained their present greatness, founding their religion on the Jewish Old Testament, with its Christian supplement, while drawing from Pagan Greece and Eome much of their legislative ability, their colonial system of government, and their poetical and philosophic taste. Judea, Greece, and Eome have thus formed the chief educational studies of Britam. Belying firmly on Christianity, derived originally from Judea, and on Greece and Eome for models of artistic excellence and of legal wisdom. BRITISH POWER AND THOUGHT 97 Britain entered upon her arduous task of dealing with foreign neighbours and with far distant subjects. Her frequent wars and almost constant enmity with France and Spain had ended in no territorial acquisitions, except Gibraltar and Malta. By degrees Britain lost all territory in France, nor did she acquire any of permanent importance in other parts of Europe. Her political destiny was to explore, conquer, and finally annex large territories in Asia, Africa, and America, chiefly by the aid of extraordinary naval power. These possessions, apparently most of them permanent, are still governed by the British, who never seem now to interfere with the religions of any of their subjects. In this new tolerant policy Britain is equalled by Eussia in Asia, and also by France in Africa. Yet this policy is a great change in Christian philosophy from Christian feelings during the Middle Ages. When Christianity was first practically established, surviving Jewish, and afterwards Pagan, perse- cution, it scarcely seemed to know its political duty in dealing with non-Christian subjects. Christians had indeed often followed the sublime example of Jesus and of His Apostles in nobly enduring every kind of persecution for the sake of the faith. 98 BRITISH POWER AND THOUGHT But for ruling infidel nations wisely and justly they had no practical example before them. The em- phatic precepts of the Christian Prophet, enjoining the duties generally of mercy and charity, did not seem to apply to political rule in the minds of many Christians for a long period. Among a thoughtful few they may have been always partly understood, but in the legal enactments of Christian Governments for many years about non-Christian subjects it would be impossible to trace practical resemblance to the spirit of Him whom they nominally acknow- ledged as their guide and teacher in the duties of life. It cannot be maintained that the spirit of the Old Testament agrees with the New in teaching politi- cal justice or religious toleration among ruling nations. In the former book the Jews are heroes or martyrs for religious truth ; in the latter they seem its in- credulous and persecuting foes. Hence their severe treatment by Christian and by Mohammedan rulers, despite their all receiving the Jewish Old Testament. Eecent years, however, have in some countries raised the Jews almost to the level of their rulers in enjoy- ment of civil rights, though in other lands, even in Europe, they remain, if not actually persecuted, yet the objects of intense popular dislike. BRITISH POWER AND THOUGHT 99 CHAPTEE IX Contrast between the martial spirit of Christian nations and their peaceful faith — Legal severity in Britain towards political of- fences and differing religions rapidly diminishing — Comparative indifference of Christians and of non-Christians about religious conversion. The contrast between the heroic piety of Christians in adversity and their bigoted cruelty wlien in political power may be partly explained by recollecting the greater influence that example usually has over precept in directing men's conduct to each other. In adver- sity the early Christians had the example of their Prophet to guide as well as to advise. Hence the calm constancy, self-reliance, and steady endurance they displayed under every form of persecution. Under all the trials and wrongs that men could inflict upon others the remembrance of Jesus was always a moral support of invincible power. But in political authority Christians had only His precepts to follow, and these were often differently interpreted or represented even by sincere believers. Had H 2 100 BRITISH POWER AND THOUGHT Jesus ever been in power with soldiers or obedierit officials to enforce His will, then Christian rulers would have had their example set unmistakably before them. But Heaven had decreed otherwise, and He was only known to mankind in obscure adversity. Politically obedient to Eoman authority while disput- ing with the priesthood of His own nation, Jesus was always a loyal subject to the Eoman laws, and died, humanly speaking, in their dominion. Had He pos- sessed temporal authority over even a small village among a few followers, His example in that position towards those in their power far more decisively might have taught His believers their real duties than lay in the power of transmitted precepts. Yet these were all the instructions left by Him to His followers. They were indeed amply sufficient, as history proves, to enable them to firmly endure persecution, cruelty, and every injustice in the power of their fellow-men to inflict during adversity. But when, in course of time, future believers in Jesus became political rulers, either as kings, priests, states- men, or legislators, the need of His actual example in power is sufficiently evident in the disgraceful records of Christian political government. Even in the limited sphere of British history the appalling BRITISH POWER AND THOUGHT 101 difference between the spirit of Christianity as ex- pressed in the Gospel and the laws and political con- duct of Christian rulers is really extraordinary. This contrast is specially shown during political revolts and religious dissensions. To thoughtful students this surprising difference between the spirit of the Christian faith and that of Christian legisla- tion for many years forms one of the strangest studies in moral history. During some centuries in Britain people accused of nothing save political or religious errors were subjected to the extreme penalty of the law with the apparent full sanction of public opinion. Men convicted of either in the opinions of their judges lost all claim to the mercy of religious or political opponents who happened then to be in power. Those who carefully study Christian history in Britain, as well as in Europe generally, will perceive that blameless personal character, or harmless, virtuous lives availed nothing to save people from the relentless cruelty of religious or of political oppo- nents. In the great division of Christian opinion caused by the Eeformation, while opposing Christians contended jealously with one another in behalf of what each believed the sacred truth, they openly and legally violated the greatest of Christian virtues, 102 BEITISH POWEE AND THOUGHT charity, in the firm belief they were doing right. The same was the case in political civil wars or rebellions in Britain and Ireland, when the religious element was not directly involved. The two alleged offences of spreading false doctrines or of committing treason were for centuries in Christian history alike believed deserving of death. In Britain and other parts of Europe, amid Christian contentions, the Jews, long persecuted by united Christians, became gradu- ally less oppressed by the opposing votaries of the prevailing faith. Despite the irritating records of Christian history, these firm opponents of Christianity became really more safe under the rule of its divided followers than the latter were under each other. In fact, to utterly deny Christianity was considered practically more excusable by many Christian Governments than to profess differing forms of it. Yet, invariably true to their ancestral religious belief, the Jews remained passive and silent during the vehement disputes and appalling persecutions of their Christian rulers among themselves. This wonderful race, thought by Christians once peculiarly en- lightened, but afterwards obstinate and incorrigible foes, lived peaceably under their rule. Mohammedan- ism, after its first rise and victorious progress, settled BRITISH POWER AND THOUGHT 103 down in comparative inactivity. Though beUeved by the most intelligent among Asiatics and Africans, this faith made few converts among Christians, and has, though very gradually, at length become politi- cally subservient to Christian power or influence throughout the world. Britain, Eussia, and France are the three chief nations which, politically speaking, have made almost the complete conquest of Moham- medanism. Yet their final triumph is strangely delayed by their mutual jealousy. At the very period when all non-Christians are comparatively powerless, or at least incapable of serious opposition, Christianity in its political progress is more obstructed by its own divisions than by external foes. This state of things is a surprising contrast to the time of the Crusades, when devoted Christian Powers firmly allied together waged heroic warfare against powerful Mohammedans, who remained practically victorious at the close of those terrible contests. It can hardly be denied by candid foreigners that the British have hitherto ex- celled other nations in ruling an immense variety of political subjects differing in religion, habits, and national character. The Eussians and the French at present govern millions of Mohammedans, but few belonging to any other non-Christian faith, except 104 BRITISH POWEE AND THOUGHT the Jews. The British, besides their Jewish and Mohammedan subjects, rule Parsees, Brahmins, and Buddhists with a political success which, though interrupted by occasional outbreaks, is yet one of the most remarkable achievements in modern history. The vast change which time and its lessons have made in British policy towards differing nations and religions is doubtless greatly due to literary influence on the English public mind. The published informa- tion of many travellers has lately much enlightened home-staying fellow-countrymen in all relating to foreign lands and their inhabitants which the toler- ance of modern British thought has turned to practical purpose. The influence of Christianity alone, however, it must be owned, for many centuries in British history did little to mitigate the harshness or diminish the bigotry of political legislation. The laws enacted by sincere Christians, and steadily en- forced by them against religious and political op- ponents, show little difference in their unjustifiable cruelty from those of Pagan days. In the comparatively small bounds of British history, readers, if comparing the earliest wars or revolutions recorded in Europe generally with those of 1715 and 1745 in Britain alone, will perceive little BRITISH POWER AND THOUGHT 105 diminution ia the legal severity of political opponents. During Britain's Christian dissensions the zeal of religious enthusiasts doubtless irritated them against one another to the utmost. Yet when the religious element was at least nominally absent— as in these Jacobite revolts of 1715 and 1745 — fellow-Protestants treated each other with similar legalised cruelty as alleged ' traitors ' or ' rebels,' and evidently with the sanction of public opinion. These two great offences of religious error or political treason, without any moral guilt or even accusation, have caused the execution of some of the noblest Christians and non- Christians by those who themselves believed in the religion of mercy. The alleged sins of ' heresy ' or of ' superstition,' of meditated treason and of political revolt, were declared through a long course of Chris- tian history to be justly punished by death alone. In cases of treason or political rebellion, the ancient Pagans and the Christians of the eighteenth and part of the nineteenth century were equally relent- less. Whether in Athens, Eome, or in the modern European capitals, political rebels were usually sen- tenced to death. Eeligious offenders were apparently less severely punished by Pagans than by Jewish or by subsequent Christian legislation. Among the 106 BRITISH POWER AND THOUGHT Pagans, religious persecution was comparatively rare except in the case of the early Christians, when their political revolt was either alleged or contemplated. The Jews, never being a ruling people in their best days, had few if any political subjects to deal with. But the Eoman Pagans, while often executing ' traitors ' without mercy, usually tolerated religious opinions, provided they did not oppose the essential political submission to Eoman authority. WhUe ancient Greek poetry and philosophy always charmed learned Europeans, the legislative and political wisdom of the Eomans was generally consulted, as the foundation of European knowledge and imitation, on almost every point except religion. This most important of all matters of thought has been during many centuries throughout Europe derived entirely from Judea. While the old European faiths of Jupiter and of Odin were completely replaced by Chris- tianity, its predecessor Judaism accompanied its pro- gress in every civilised land. Yet the Jews remained incredulous as to the claims of the Gospel and of the subsequent Koran on human belief. These successive additions, therefore, to the Old Testament are to this day alike repudiated by that firm, surviving race on whose ancient religious history Christianity and BRITISH POWER AND THOUGHT 107 Mohammedanism both rely. This fact, though well known to educated people, seems less discussed than might be expected among the Christian majority. Every Sunday throughout European countries the Christian Prophet is described, according to His believers alone, while the views, motives, and prin- ciples of His unbelieving fellow-coimtrymen are either ignored or briefly noticed as false and dan- gerous. While by most civilised men all religions are now repudiated except Judaism and its additions of Christianity and Mohammedanism, there seems surprisingly little inclination among the votaries of these systems, despite their free social intercourse, to compare or discuss their differing religious views in peaceful argument. Eeligious differences, even upon minor points, still seem to arouse more irritation than calm reasoning. There always seems something in this great subject of universal interest which in its examination arouses anger rather than self-control. Among Christians this result may be partly owing to their seldom if ever alluding to Jewish distrust of Jesus in a spirit of calm inquiry, but usually with indignation, as if this incredulity was in itself a sin, and not as sincere as their own belief in Him. On the other hand, the modern Jews seem rarely to 108 BRITISH POWER AND THOUGHT mention their deified fellow-countryman. Even in Britain, where for many years religious discussion has been perfectly safe, and where educated Christians and Jews meet in almost every profession, religious arguments among their respective clergy seem of very rare occurrence, or are not published to the reading world. London, of all cities, would seem most suitable at present for learned Jews and Chris- tians to examine their religious differences freely without anger or excitement. The position of the Jews under British rule thoroughly satisfies them in every political and social sense. The most able Christian scholars of all sects might easily meet in London from every country. London would then become the scene of the most profound, important, and interesting of religious discussions ever known. Yet while comparatively trivial differences between ■Jellow-Christians, sometimes even between fellow- Protestants, attract or interest the British public mind, the all-important religious differences between the Jews and every Christian denomination remain in a great measure excluded from calm theological discussion. BRITISH POWEB ASD THOUGHT 109 CHAPTEE X Christianity and Mohammedanism the chief religions exercising political power — Constancy of the Jews in preserving their faith uninfluenced by Christians or by Mohammedans — Modern ex- ploration in Asia and Africa chiefly accomplished by Europeans. In civilised history, religious influence is probably greater than any other, though it may not always seem so, in directing national policy. Though great conquerors or rulers in Pagan and in Christian periods for a time seem to guide the thoughts of men, yet after their departure from a world of temporary strife it is again the permanent influence of religious belief that mainly directs the history of mankind. During centuries of recorded time the faiths of Jupiter, of Odin, of Zoroaster, and of Judaism have guided nearly all men who had any claim to civilisa- tion. The extinct faiths of Egypt, and of other African and Asiatic countries, seem not within the power even of this inquiring age to thoroughly elucidate. Since their disappearance, the compara- tively modern religions of Christianity and of 11.0 BRITISH POWER AND THOUGHT Mohammedanism, relying on Jewish history, yet disowned by the Jews, have ruled and still rule the minds of a majority of civilised men. The chief political power, influence, or enterprises were for many years, and are still, confined to the votaries of these two religions. The chief ancient faiths still surviving, which, though politically weak, rival them in real intensity of religious conviction, are Judaism, Brahminism, Buddhism, and Parseeism. But their present relative positions, like their history, though presenting some resemblance in their political j^ejak; ness, are yet very different. While the modern Jews resemble Christian or Mohammedan rulers in almost every respect save religion, and live in most civilised countries, the Brahmins and Buddhists, despite ^their immense numbers, yet remain to a great extent apart, except in Japan, from the general intercourse of tlj.8 civilised world, and, comparatively speaking,^ake little part in its affairs. The Parsees, though few, yet of late seem not only increasing in number, but to be rising considerably in the estimation of civilised Europeans. During many years Christianity and Mohammedanism, each warlike and enthusiastic, have contended for political supremacy in parts of Europe, Asia, and Africa. This contest has long since BRITISH POWER AND THOUGHT 111 ended in Christian political triumph, as the present positions of Britain, France, and Eussia, ruling millions of Mohammedans, prove decisively. Eeaders interested in historical study may well be impressed by the extraordinary, and probably unforeseen, changes in men's minds on the subjects of national justice and religious toleration. The early history of Christianity was not likely to implant the ideas of the present day on those subjects. Its Founder had lived entirely amid a nation peculiarly unsuited or disin- clined to religious discussion, and perfectly satisfied with its ancestral faith. The Pagan world of Greece and Eome at times rather distrusted its religion, and was comparatively willing at least to hear, if not to accept, new doctrines, while the Jews clung to their faith as a source not only of consolation, but of national pride and glory. This last idea was specially contradicted by the Christian Founder, who dis- couraged altogether the belief in the preference of the Jewish race by the Creator. He had no idea of the national superiority of any particular race of men in the sight of Heaven. Though a Jew himself, apparently He showed no national admiration for the ancient glories of His race, or regret at their political subjection to the Eomans. He practically 112 BEITISH ?0"WEE AND THOUGHT endeavoured to increase naoral Virtue, exhorting His hearers to fulfil the duties of charity, mercy, and forgiveness, but distinctly intimating that no race of men was preferred to another by their Maker. A teaching so unacceptable to the Jews was generally repudiated by them ; and, failing in Judea to make many converts, it gradually met with a very different reception among the Pagan subjects of the Eoman empire. Though the new faith was subsequently called by the name of its Founder, it does not appear that it was ever named so during His life. When compared with other contemporary or previous religions, Christianity rather resembles a cosmopolitan form or version of Judaism, in which the story of the Old Testament was to be received, yet with a different construction from that maintained by the Jews. When denying the fact of Jewish national pre- ference or favour, Jesus denied what was perhaps the most attractive part of the Old Testament to the Jewish mind. Yet this denial doubtless aided the spread of Christianity among other nations and its triumph among highly intellectual people like the Greeks and the Eomans, who could' never believe that the Jews, from their national history or character, were BRITISH POWER AND THOUGHT 113 superior to themselves or in any way preferred to their ancestors by the Creator. In ancient Jewish history there would seem little for friends of humanity to admire, or wish to see imitated by other nations. There seems scarcely any regard paid to human pro- gress ia the diffusion of general knowledge or of legal justice in that gloomy, selfish record of one solitary ■nation almost avowedly ' hated of all and hating ' throughout the Old Testament. Yet among this isolated, exclusive race there arose an apparent believer in their faith who ' taught daily ' in the principal Church of their capital, but who more and more separated Himself from Jewish traditions, hopes, and opinions. The Jewish priesthood, probably the most intelli- gent and influential of their race, at least during their subjection to the Eomans, had always devotedly adhered to their belief in national preference or superiority, as maintained in the Old Testament. This proud and practically selfish idea was now questioned, and finally denied by a professed Jew, perhaps for the first time in history, though doubtless it was always discredited, probably ridiculed, by other nations. The Christian Prophet, however, devoted His wonderful influence over a few hearers I 114 BRITISH POWER AND THOUGHT to condemn and reject this hereditary and selfish consolation of the subjected Jews. In open censure, as well as in interesting parables instructive and improving to believers, but irritating to unconverted Jews, He tried to check their spiritual pride as completely as the Eomans had subdued their political freedom. The historical result was what might perhaps have been expected when the religious as well as political state of the Eoman empire at this period is carefully considered, without prejudice or enthusiasm. This vast territory comprised all -European civilisation, while that of Asia and of Africa, though now considerably brought to light by modern discovery, was till recently little known to European nations. The religious world at the time of Jesus was evidently divided, though unequally, between the Paganism of Jupiter and of Odin in Europe, and Parseeism, Buddhism or Brabminism, and Judaism in Asia, while comparatively vague traditions of ancient African religions were alone transmitted to posterity. Early Christianity made slight, yet somewhat permanent, progress in western Asia and north-eastern Africa, but acquired little, if any, political power in either. Europe seemed its natural and welcoming home when repudiated Beitish power and thought 115 throughout Judea. After a period of persecution in the Eoman empire, apparently caused more by- political apprehension than zealous devotion to the declining Paganism, Christianity effected its almost entire conquest ; but the steady incredulity of the Jews remained unchanged by either their political subjection or subsequent national dispersion. Their religion, as presented in the Old Testament alone, was their pride as well as their consolation, and it has hitherto firmly withstood and survived almost every imaginable adversity. This book cohtinues a monument, as they think, of their national glory and special preference. No political or social changes in this world have hitherto shaken their confidence in the national gratification — it might almost be said, the national flattery — of its spirit and teaching. The Pagan world, on the contrary, was far more inclined from the very first to accept Christianity, while little enthusiasm was shown for the vanishing faith, except by a few philosophic minds, whose views were gradually over- come by the general adoption of its successor among Pagan fellow-countrymen. Christianity gradually became the political mistress of Europe, yet it was in most countries accompanied by its hereditary foes, I 2 116 BRITISH POWER AND THOUGHT the incredulous Jews. They were totally different from any other religious thinkers with whom Christian preachers had to deal. Their knowledge of Christian history was the same as that of Christians themselves, while their construction of it was alto- gether different, and remains so to this day. The believers in Jupiter, who adhered to their faith during its political power, for some time apprehended that the new religion might cause sedition against the Eoman Emperors. Some of these sovereigns, though of opposite characters, such as the terrible Nero and the virtuous Trajan, alike vainly tried to suppress it for the same reason. Yet their efforts were not apparently aided by much zeal for the declining Paganism ; and Christianity, making its way steadily throughout the Eoman Empire, finally re- placed it in every country where it had once reigned supreme. The believers in Odin apparently offered even less opposition to Christianity, and their faith, like that of Jupiter, yielded completely to the new religion. The survival of Judaism, despite its long political subjection to Pagans, to Christians, and to Mohammedans, is undoubtedly one of the most remarkable, perhaps inexplicable, events in the religious history of man. This fact has scarcely BRITISH POWER AND THOUGHT 117 attracted Christian attention, either among clergy or laity, as much as its philosophical importance demands. Its neglect may be partly explained by the usual indifference of the Jews about making converts to their creed. As a rule, neither of the great proselytising religions of Christianity and Mohammedanism ever dreaded or experienced much desertion to the Jewish faith from their votaries. The Jews, since their national dispersion, in mediaeval and in modern times, were nearly as indifferent to these religions as their ancestry were to the ancient' Paganisms. When, therefore. Christians and Mohammedans made war on each other, and when, subsequently, each was engaged in disputes and warfare among themselves, their powerless, yet still incredulous opponent, Judaism, quietly existed among their divisions in most civilised lands, seldom showing any inclination to yield to the religious influence or ideas of Christian or of Mohammedan rulers. The discovery and colonisation of the New World of America, made and completed by Christians exclusively, effected no change in religious history, despite its vast social as well as political importance. This new continent positively taught nothing new of any value in either 118 BRITISH POWER AND THOUGHT political or religious history. It had to all appearance no connection whatever with the previous history of the Old World. It neither confirmed nor denied anything ; European religion, thoughts, languages, and customs, as well as inhabitants, were transferred there, while America certainly contributed many valuable additions to the comfort of modern European life. On the grand subject of Eeligion, however, the New World, so magnificent in all features of natural beauty, was absolutely silent. It revealed nothing. Had it been a new creation, when first discovered by Europeans, it could hardly have been more utterly barren than it proved about all connected with religious or ancient history. Europeans invaded, conquered, and colonised it from end to end, introducing differing forms of Christianity, unopposed by any zeal of the ignorant natives in behalf of their vague heathenisms, which apparently threw no light on their country's religious or poli- tical history. Long after the complete conquest of this vast, unrevealing territory, European energy, knowledge, and enterprise began to elucidate more and more the secrets of Asiatic and of African antiquity. This wonderful revelation of what had for centuries seemed the buried past has made BRITISH POAVER AND THOUGHT 119 immense progress recently, and especially from the middle of the nineteenth century to the present date. European scholars, chiefly British, German, French, and Italian, have accomplished this enterprise, while the Spaniards and Portuguese, as if exhausted by their conquering and colonising efforts throughout America, have taken less part in the elucidation of the Old World mysteries. These European scholars, inspired by the intense interest and enlightenment of historical research, and supported by the political influence of their rulers, have now penetrated into almost every part of Asia and Africa. The explorations so remarkable in the nineteenth century, and still continuing, seem to verify in many remarkable details the historical transmission of recorded time. The researches of Layard and Kawlinson in Asia, and of Maspero, Flinders Petrie, and others in Africa, recall in silent grandeur many of their historical wonders. While western Europeans chiefly accomplish these explora- tions, the comparatively ignorant descendants of famous races behold them with passive wonder, affording little assistance, except in manual exertion^ The wisdom and knowledge of the human race seem for many centuries now to have been transferred t 120 BEITISH POWER AND THOUGHT from the east and from the south to the north and to the west. Italy, Britain, France, Germany, and more latterly Eussia, have acquired the knowledge and the capacity for its use which in ancient history, as told by the Jews and the Greeks, formerly existed almost exclusively in western Asia and in Egypt. European nations at present seem, both in political power and in scholastic knowledge, infinitely superior to any other. In these respects they have literally no rival at the present time. The stationary position or stolid indifference of most American colonists apparently confines their thoughts to the limits of their own continent. Except some valuable inven- tions by certain inhabitants of the United States, with which they have benefited the civilised world, neither they nor the people of South America seem to take much part or interest in the politics of Europe and Asia, except lately in China. It is Europe which now for some time past has displayed and performed the noblest efforts, the highest thoughts, and the most daring successful enterprises of which mankind has hitherto proved capable. Throughout history, the greatest physical and intel- lectual triumphs of men have been confined to a minority of the many nations which comprise them. BEITISH POWER AND THOUGHT 121 This minority, though a small one considering the millions of comparatively ignorant, helpless, or in- active men, still continues, and perhaps always will continue, to rule the worldly destinies of the human race. But it is now found in different countries from those in which it formerly existed. The intel- lect and the power of new races of mankind now influence countries once possessing those gifts exclusively, and which seem to bequeath their superiority to the natives of distant lands instead of to their own degenerate inhabitants. Eeligious history, which really has a more decisive permanent effect on men than is always acknowledged, ascribes its chief enlightenment to those countries whose present inhabitants are com- paratively unable to understand or appreciate the departed greatness of their remote ancestry. All religions of permanent importance have arisen in Asia ; but for centuries European Christians have known far more about its various faiths, from a historical standpoint, than either Asiatic or African races. 122 BRITISH POWER AND THOUGHT CHAPTEE XI Love of war in most nations from the earliest times— Dissensions between the most learned Christians during the Protestant Refor- mation — The previous division between the Greek and Latin Churches aroused less animosity. The conduct of different races of men to each other, in their increased political, social, and religious inter- course recently, requires a careful examination. The difference between ancient, mediaeval, and modern times is in this respect remarkable. The first in- timation of history which seems to modern minds reliable proceeds from Greece, Judea, and more lately from Eome. The vague partial revelations manifested in Assyria and Egypt, though of great interest and some value, throw but little light on the real history or social state of those wonderful countries. It is from the religious chronicles of the Jews, the poetry and philosophy of the Greeks, and the vast conquests as well as the legislative wisdom of the Eomans, that modern Europeans derive the historic facts, characters, opinions, and habits of BRITISH POWEE AND THOUGHT 123 ancient times. The vague traditions of northern Europe transmit little trustworthy information to posterity. While Judea, Greece, and Italy afford immense and varied historic information to modern British, French, and Germans, the ancestors of these three nations furnish very little about their own history. In the Greek poetry, as in the Jewish Scriptures, those literary models which have specially stood the test of time, and were transmitted with admiration by successive generations of civilised men, feelings of national enmity are usually preva- lent. The love of warfare is openly manifested in the earliest histories of mankind. Though the splendid narratives of Greek or of Jewish warlike triumphs exhibit the highest efforts of human genius, philanthropists may well deplore their calamitous results to the human race generally. The Jewish annals, like those of Greece and later of Eome, abound with lavish praises of warriors, victories, and martial exploits. There was much, indeed, in the spirit of Judaism and also of Paganism to encourage the love of warfare. Both these faiths have finally yielded in political power to Christian replacers, whose religion, unlike those of its predecessors, advocated and was often called the religion of Peace. 124 BRITISH POWER AND THOUGHT Its Founder in His few recorded words never praised warlike exploits in any age or country ; yet His iollowers when they obtained political power after a period of subjection, became gradually as warlike even with each other as any Jewish or Pagan prede- cessors. Europe, after the fall of the Eoman empire, eventually was divided entirely among Christian rulers. All vestiges of its former faiths had disap- peared, while the Jews, who believed they had done a religious duty in trying to suppress Christianity by procuring the execution of its Foxmder, became powerless and therefore peaceful subjects of the believers in their repudiated fellow-countryman. When Christians were first in political authority, they evidently found less to guide them in the Gospel than when they were in adversity. Jesus had always lived under the rule of the Romans, of which He never complained, and among disaffected fellow- countrymen longing for a martial Jewish deliverer from the Pagan yoke. Yet His political advice to them was couched in few words, but decisively enjoined obedience to Eoman authority, and dis- couraged all revolutionary ideas among the Jews of His period, despite their attraction for the young and enterprising. Yet no practical example in the art BRITISH POWER AND THOUGHT 125 of ruling either fellow-Christians or non-Christians ■was ever distinctly given by Him or by those who had personally known Him. He was eminently the advocate and preacher of moral goodness, and of charity in every form, but seems to have avoided imparting political or educational information. His recorded words never mention the State religion of Eome and Greece, Parseeism, Buddhism, or any other form of belief existing in His time. His efforts, so far as known, were devoted to the task of rendering His hearers, mostly Jews, more charitable, and to utterly abandon their ancestral idea of national pre- ference. In His moral advice as to charity and mercy He evidently had some success, as proved in His undeniable popularity in some Jewish towns, and perhaps yet more in some country districts. But in His repudiation of the Jews as a nation specially favoured. He inevitably incurred dangerous indignation among incredulous, offended fellow-countrymen, which hastened, if it did not entirely cause, His execution. Yet in all His discourses, as far as they are known, little, if any, political or legislative instruction was given to future Christian rulers how they were to act in that capacity. He almost avowedly came to make people better rather than wiser, at least in the 126 BEITISH POWEE AND THOUGHT estimation of worldly men. His kingdom was not of this world, as He proclaimed, yet His ultimate influence over it has heen unparalleled throughout human history. His design on earth was chiefly to soften people's hearts by inclining them to acts of mutual benevolence during their short lives, while He took scarcely any notice of their political, social, or intellectual position. When He and those who knew Him were gone His few recorded expressions were all that were left to successive generations of Christians to really know about Him. In these few words, expounded, repeated, and studied by millions of believers since His departure from this world, little in a direct form can be discovered to guide or influence the policy of rulers professing to obey Him, or to live in such a way as He would approve. His words usually seem better understood by a minority consisting of thoughtful, retired, unambitious men than by the more enterprising, resolute spirits who have aspired to rule for a brief time over this tran- sitory world. Christian rulers, therefore, while pro- fessing to follow Gospel doctrine, during many centuries often showed little difference in their conduct from their Pagan predecessors. The one sublime example withdrawn from this world, without BRITISH POWER AND THOUGHT 127 being ever in political power, the few men who had known Him personally also being gone, and, like Him, always in adversity, only a few recorded words were transmitted for men's instruction. Thus the fierce passions of human nature, though con- demned by the living example of Jesus, soon resumed their sway, and ambition, pride, cruelty, and selfish- ness became as paramount in Christian history as in that of Pagan times. Among a thoughtful few, how- ever, the spirit of Jesus was always transmitted through passing generations, sometimes animating influential men and sometimes practically ignored in politics, in legislation, and even in religious teaching of professing Christians. This fact gradually formed the subject of very serious reflection in the minds of merciful or tolerant Christians. It became more and more acknowledged by them that the so-called spirit of Jesus, which He certainly inculcated, was some- times more displayed by non-Christians than by some of those who knew and who believed all that is recorded of Him. Unlike most rulers of men, who, despite their superior knowledge, may very fully share in the pride and vanity of human nature, Jesus evidently approved of virtuous conduct wherever it existed, infinitely more than of personal respect or 128 BRITISH POWER AND TK OUGHT accurate knowledge about Himself. He knew that such mental enlightenment was mainly due to chance causes — either to men's peculiar education or to their historical and geographical position. But virtuous men in all lands were practical Christians who were truly, though unconsciously, obedient to those precepts with which He wished to inspire mankind, while many of His followers, knowing all that could be ascertained about Him, were yet dis- obedient and opposed to His principles. During many centuries of Christian history, therefore, the firm, incredulous Jews may have truly said that though the new faith was termed a religion of peace, and though its clergy announced its peculiar blessings as belonging specially to Christianity, yet the laws and conduct of Christian nations were as oppressive, unjust, and cruelly persecuting as ever known in the history of man. In the political histories of Pagan Eome and of Christian Britain, France, and Spain, there seems little improvement, if any, in humane legislation for a long period. Political or religious victims in Pagan times were thrown to wild beasts j in Christian times they were destroyed, chiefly, by fire or by the tortures of ingenious instruments devised by perverted human skill for the purpose. BRITISH POWEE AND THOUGHT 129 The enjoined Christian duties of charity and mercy to the conquered or helpless were ignored or violated for a long period of Christian history as much as in Pagan times, nor did the perpetrators seem to feel remorse for their extraordinary, often most deliberate, cruelty. Such merciless con- duct among Christians, sometimes even to one another, was likely in many cases caused more by fear than by actual malignity. The prevailing religious or political party thought, perhaps truly, that its own existence depended on the destruction of its opponents, and therefore mercy to them was dangerous to those extending it. Those who carefully study the histories of Pagan and of Christian wars or revolts to as late a period as the eighteenth century in Britain and in Ireland, will perceive this to be the idea. During most of the wars and revolutions in Christian Europe, the practical violation of the faith by legalised cruelty can be partly explained by the same reason. The intensity of party spirit or of religious and political enmity was so great that the moral instructions of the Christian Founder were often disregarded by His sincere believers. Chris- tianity reigned instead of Paganism, but political or religious prejudice and legalised cruelty were for 130 BRITISH POWER AND THOUGHT many years scarcely diminished by the change. Men's passions, directly they were aroused, seemed the same as ever, especially among their rulers, who were evidently supported by public opinion. The truly Christian spirit survived chiefly among retired men who took little part in political affairs, yet who kept what enthusiasts might term the holy light per- petually manifest, often more by silent example than by avowed precept. But the temptations of ambition, of jealousy, and of selfishness remained very little changed by the warnings of Jesus throughout the Christian world. The love of warfare, which the Gospel would seem to strongly discourage or con- demn, was never more prevalent among so many different Christian nations as during the life of Napoleon I. in the nineteenth century. Ever since the establishment of Christianity in political power Christian nations have frequently warred with each other and with Mohammedans. The latter were for a long time the chief political opponents of Chris- tianity, though believing many of its doctrines, and certainly showing more respect towards it than their own faith received till recently from Christians. Amid this strife the Papacy, for many centuries spiritually guiding the religious thoughts of most BEITISH POWER AND THOUGHT 131 European Christians, seldom took much political part except in occasionally warning or excommunica- ting offending monarchs, and also in vainly entreating the Christian Powers to prevent the Turks from entering Europe. This powerful, and, according to many Christians, venerable institution, long after its establishment, had rather suddenly to encounter a spiritual revolt against its authority by some of the most devout and zealous Christians. The Protestant Eeformation, arising in several Christian countries, divided the common faith into many differing sects. It was by no means a contest between knowledge and ignorance or between zeal and scepticism. The wisdom and virtue as well as the folly and sins of its advocates and of its opponents proved that the Christian mind generally was completely divided on the question. The violence of this extraordinary contest lasted for years throughout Europe, to which it was almost entirely confined, and, while leaving the Christian world divided in opinion about some doc- trines, it did not practically weaken its influence in any country which acknowledged its general truth. During this religious contest between the most learned Christians no additional enlightenment or 132 BEITISH POWER AND THOUGHT new revelation was made to men. The dispute waa chiefly about points of doctrine, which were differently interpreted by minds equally devout, equally sincere, and often equally full of religious information as far as Scripture could give it. They were left to study and examine over and over again the scanty records of Christian history transmitted by the Gospel. The Jews maintained hereditary silence and incredulity, a policy which, since their national dispersion, they have steadily preserved, despite every temptation and injustice. The Mohammedans, gradually extending themselves over the most enlightened parts of Asia and Africa, while preferring Christianity to Judaism, neither took part in nor expressed any opinion on these disputes between fellow- Christians. They de- clared that both Jesus and Mohammed were true Prophets sent by the same Divine Creator ; neither was superior to the other in nature, but Mohammed, being the latest manifestation of God's will, was on that account alone the most reliable. The Jews could not do otherwise than view the successive additions of Gospel and Koran as alike erroneous, adhering exclusively to the Old Testament, in which Christians and Mohammedans professed a similar confidence, except in the unpopular idea of the national superiority BEITISH POWER AND THOUGHT 133 of the Jewish race to themselves or to their ancestry. Jesus and Mohammed each encountered Jewish hos- tility, while the believers in Gospel and Koran, depending entirely on the words of their respective Prophets, were alike irritated by the distrust of the Jews. There may be usually perceived in religious history an intensely prejudiced way of thinking, which in all other studies would be most carefully avoided, or thought unreliable. Even the disputes between fellow-Christians during and since the Eeformation were more distinguished for zealous enthusiasm than for calm reasoning. The same zeal for supposed religious truth was expressed, and doubtless often felt, by contending parties, while little if any justice wae done to the motives or merits of those whose religious views were thought inaccurate. The Eeformation was in many ways a melancholy contest between equally sincere, zealous, learned Christians. The exaggerated importance they attached to their points of difference, while sometimes almost ignoring the value of those opinions they shared, has been admitted by the followers of both parties, and especially during recent years, Jewish opinion on this contest was never published to Christians, and will perhaps never be known. Yet, 134 BEITISH POWEE AND THOUGHT to tlie sarcastic, the unfeeling, or the higoted among non-Christians, it may have been a source of secret triumph or consolation. No advantage, however, was taken by the latter of this civil war in the Christian world. When its violence subsided, the greater part of Europe had divided itself between the opposing parties, the Eoman Catholics prevailing chiefly in the south and the Protestants chiefly in the north. The previous division between the Greek and the Eoman Catholic Churches was comparatively peace- ful, ending in their geographical as well as doctrinal separation. Greece and Eussia became the only representatives of the eastern division of Christianity in Europe, while the spiritual supremacy of Eome for a long time prevailed throughout the most of Chris- tendom till the Eeformation arose chiefly in its northern and western countries. This contest was carried on chiefly in lands once believing in Jupiter or in Odin, yet no revival of those ancient faiths was ever contemplated among the disputing Christians. The trusted saying that a house divided against itself is sure to fall was certainly not realised, but rather contradicted by the remarkable history of Christianity. While its opposing divisions destroyed or calumniated each other with implacable bitterness, the faith, though BRITISH POWER A^'D THOUGHT 135 for a time practically violated, survived the evil passions and bigoted cruelty of its excited believers. When political peace was restored and comparatively just legislation established, the sublime Eeligion remained firm as ever, though in differing forms, among the civilised nations of Europe. During a long subsequent period, religious wars or contests arising from doctrinal enmity distracted many European countries, but gradually political ambition or national rivalry, the causes of many wars before Christianity, regained their power over the destinies of men. The peaceful philanthropy of the Gospel, or rather of Jesus alone, was soon found to have little influence in promoting real peace, or in deterring men, whether Christian or not, from the love of warfare, some- times almost for its own sake. This warlike inclina- tion, so strong in all ages, and which seems inherent in man's very nature, continues to this twentieth century to animate the young and vigorous in most countries, no matter what religion they may profess. Three great European heroes whose exploits rival or surpass the imagination of the most enthusiastic warriors, and whose achievements always attract the rising soldiers of successive generations, are pre- sented in ancient, mediaeval, and modern history, 136 BRITISH POWER AND THOUGHT Alexander the Great, Julius Caesar, and Napoleon. The conquests of the first were chiefly in Asia, in- spired, perhaps, with some of the learned curiosity of his great tutor Aristotle, though probably not deriv- ing much military instruction from that thoughtful philosopher. Alexander enlightened his fellow- countrymen by permanent discoveries in distant lands as well as by their temporary conquest. He does not seem, however, to have been much known or distinguished for wisely governing peaceful subjects. This double capacity for conquering and ruling with permanent success was more shown, or more care- fully transmitted through history, by his Eoman successor many centuries later. Julius Caesar evidently united in himself the highest qualities of a general, a ruler, and a legislator. All knowledge, as Bacon desired for himself, was Caesar's province. Shakspere well describes this wonderful man in noble lines alluding to his written commentaries : That Julius Csesar was a famous man ; With what his valour did enrich his wit, His wit set down to make his valour live : Death makes no conquest of this conqueror ; For now he lives in fame, though not in life.' ' Richard the Third. BKITISH POWEK AND THOUGHT 137 Caesar's chief conquests were throughout central and southern Europe. These two famous men belonged to the same Pagan faith, though how far, to what extent, or in what sense they trusted it, can never be known. Yet it would appear that no other religion among the numerous and varied races they con- quered at such different periods ever made any impression upon them. Parseeism and the faith of Odin must have been known to Julius Caesar, while Alexander in his Indian campaign may have known about the Brahminical faith, and Judaism was well known, or might have been, to them both. Yet each of these illustrious men, despite their great and varied knowledge, apparently retained belief in their an- cestral religions, as they never, though ia the height of political power, declared preference for any other. But they neither seem to have cared much to spread their faith among conquered nations. The political rule of Greek and afterwards of Eoman Pagans ex- tended over countries in Europe, Asia, and Africa, yet no religion seems to have been extinguished or even much persecuted by either of them. The Pagan Eomans were evidently more tolerant towards other religions than their Christian successors were for a long period of time. Yet this practical tolerance in 138 BRITISH POWER AND THOUGHT matters of religion did not arise from entirely humane motives, but more from real indifference about the opinions of others, mingled with the worldly desire to obtain tribute from all political subjects alike, without endangering or delaying its payment by arousing religious animosity among their various races. The British, the Eussians, and, to some extent, the French now follow the Eoman example in ruling foreign subjects, more than any other nation has the means of doing. The result certainly shows more loyal non-Christian subjects to the political rule of Christians than were ever recorded in the world's history. London, St. Petersburg, and Paris now receive the homage of nearly all northern and southern Asia, and of northern and southern Africa. The spectacle of so many foreign and remote nations virtually acknowledging European cities as their capitals was never known before, except in the one grand example of ancient Eome. BRITISH POWER AND THOUGHT 139 CHAPTEE XII Great increase of British influence after the fall of Napoleon — Spain and Portugal no longer formidable — Large standing armies maintained in Europe despite the general peace — Increasing popularity of the military art. The Pagan world in the time of Julius Caesar, though under Eoman instead of Greek dominion, as in that of Alexander the Great, professed a similar religious belief. The power of Jupiter, the wisdom of Minerva, the bodily strength of Hercules, and the other respective attributes of the different Pagan gods and goddesses were yet acknowledged by a majority of civilised Euro- peans. The Jews remained, though subjected, as firm and exclusive as ever in their ancestral country, still believing in their national superiority as steadily as when they were a free nation under a king of their own faith. No people were ever so uninfluenced by the history of others as the Jews, and to the present time this remains their special characteristic. In 140 BRITISH POWER AND THOUGHT fact, ruling Paganism and subjected Judaism were the chief religions of the civilised world in the times of Alexander and of Caesar, without either faith obtain- ing, or perhaps seeking to obtain, any large number of converts. Paganism through indifference, and Judaism through the exclusive nature of its national history, were neither of them proselytising religions. It was reserved for Christians and Mohammedans to rival each other in their enthusiastic exertions to make converts throughout the world. In their efforts it must be owned that their religions were wonder- fully successful, and gradually replaced in political power almost every other faith. In the time of Napoleon European Paganisms had long vanished, while Judaism, professed by a subjected nation, re- mained scattered through the world. Christianity and Mohammedanism, however, were— the first especially— strong and powerful, and both rather aggressive in foreign policy. Christianity was now a divided camp. The once persecuted faith had become often the persecuting, and in its later history showed as much intolerance towards its own differing forms as towards avowed non- Christians. These tremendous changes in religious history had all occurred during the many centuries -BRITISH POWER AND THOUGHT 141 intervening between the times of the two great con- querors, Julius Caesar and Napoleon. The political strength of Mohammedans was at its height a long period after the time of Caesar, and had greatly declined before that of Napoleon, though in his time they were firmly established in Asia and northern Africa, while their hold on Europe was only over a few of its south-eastern provinces, no longer causing any dread among neighbouring European nations. Yet the Mohammedan faith had by no means declined with its political power. It yet remains the acknowledged religion of better-educated men than it ever influenced before, owing to the increased and still increasing facilities afforded to its votaries for mingl- ing with people of every religious faith. Neither the politically subjected state of Judaism or of Moham- medanism to Christianity has brought many converts to the latter, and the converts which have been made are usually those of the more uneducated classes. The rich and learned Jews and Mohammedans as a rule adhere to their respective faiths, and have done so steadily, amid the tempting influences of Chris- tian intercourse and enlightenment. Yet for a long period neither Jews, Mohammedans, nor any other non- Christians have been really formidable to mankind. 142 BRITISH POWER AND THOUGHT Napoleon literally found no non-Christian foes worthy of his steel. In his time different Christian Powers were not only supreme in Europe, but had greatly extended their power in Asia and Africa, an extension which ever since appears to be steadily in- creasing. In Europe the religious divisions among Christians, so prevalent during the Middle Ages, and which had influenced the political feelings of many nations, gradually yielded to the attractions of political ambition. The division of the Eoman Catholic kingdom of Poland by Protestant Prussians, Catholic Austrians, and Kussian believers in the Greek Church proved how united these representa- tives of the Christian churches became when tempted by political interests. The Papacy, which had for centuries exercised a calm, beneficent influence over Christian Governments, could do nothing to prevent this extraordinary act of public plunder. As vehe- ment religious disputes between opposing Christians became gradually a subject for peaceful argument, they lost much of their popular attraction, becoming more confined to a studious minority, and ceased to influence either kings or Governments to the same extent. Political apprehensions, almost irrespective of religious interests, chiefly engaged European BRITISH POWER A\D THOUGHT 143 attention in Napoleon's time. The position of Christian Powers had inevitably changed greatly since their iirst establishment. Spain and Portugal seemed alike somewhat exhausted by their vast colonisation of America. Spain, by her extraordinary gigantic enterprise against Britain, resulting in the total loss of her immense navy, had never recovered her former power. Spain and Portugal in fact seemed weakened rather than strengthened by the ultimate effect of their colonial enterprises, and ceased to take a leading part in European affairs. Italy, once the political ruler of nearly all the civilised world, and which afterwards became to a great extent its spiritual ruler in the Middle Ages, was during Napoleon's period a country of little importance. Napoleon found, when ruling France, that the chief opponents of his ambition were Britain, Eussia, Austria, and Prussia, who eventually became united against him. After his final defeat by their allied forces, combined together against their common enemy, Britain has taken, if not the leading at least a prominent part in the affairs not only of Europe, but of the world at large. The enduring success of the British in obtaining and preserving so lofty a posi- tion has of course been very differently explained by 144 BRITISH POWER AND THOUGHT English and by foreign writers, but the fact remains indisputable. Yet though among the strongest, if not the very strongest, of Christian nations, the British have never rivalled in artistic triumph the mediaeval and modern Italians, whose superior excellence in this respect rather than in literature has replaced their former martial glory and political power in the estimation of men. In painting, in music, and in statuary Italy excels among civilised nations. In these arts representations taken from Christian his- tory naturally replace those from the Pagan. Jesus and the Virgin Mary are presented as samples of bodily as well as moral perfection. The Madonna of Raphael was taken from an Italian original, and the personal appearance of the Christian Founder is represented by that of modern Italians celebrated for their beauty. As no personal descriptions occur in the Gospel, the Italian painters evidently indulged their own imaginations in replacing the Pagan Deities by the new objects of religious worship, and endowing them also with fancied beauty, without any evidence of historical accuracy. It is likely that popular prejudice against the Jews, under the Christian yoke, had discouraged Christian artists from taking them as their models in representing Jesus BRITISH POWER AND THOUGHT 145 or the Virgin Mary. Yet had they done so they would probably have been nearer the truth in their delinea- tion. A vast amount of artistic talent throughout Europe was for some centuries devoted to the adornment, description, and worship of Christianity. The magnificent masses and requiems by foreign musical composers were enthusiastically devoted to its service. Christianity gradually became the re- ligion of the senses as well as of the mind, and the genius of nearly all the civilised world seemed de- voted to its glorification. Neither Jews nor Moham- medans associated similar attractions with their faiths in the same degree. The former certainly re- corded musical celebrations in their ancient days, apparently chiefly instrumental ; but none of their vocal music, and few, if any, of their musical instru- ments, seem to have descended to posterity. The Mohammedans never appealed to the fine arts to aid or enhance the attractions of their faith. They in many respects reiterated the Christian precepts and also venerated the Christian Prophet to an extent which no sincere Jews could be expected to do. Their political power, however, and warlike tendency had so alarmed, if not endangered the Christian world for many years that little notice was taken of their L 146 BRITISH POWER AND THOUGHT respectful feelings towards the Christian Prophet, and they were regarded as thorough enemies to His faith. This unreasoning higotry in so many nations, and lasting for a long period, is a regrettable feature in religious history. It cannot be denied that Moham- medanism was a great improvement on the Arabian idolatry it supplanted, which claimed human sacrifices and resembled those debasing superstitions often mentioned in the Old Testament as existing in Syria and in adjoining lands. In its stead Mohammedanism arose, acknowledging many doctrines of Christianity and of Jewish history. It ascribed no higher posi- tion to Mohammed than to Jesus. They were alike true prophets ; but Mohammed, being the later, must therefore, it said, have brought the most precious revelation of the Deity who had sent both into the world to make conversions. Yet this religious affinity between Christian and Mohammedan doctrines, though amid numbers of unbelievers in both, led to no reconciliation for a long period between them. Political enmity as well as ignorant bigotry for many years prevented fair mutual inquiry into the full particulars of their respective faiths, while frequent and sanguinary wars occurred between their adherents. No other religious denomination could compare with BEITISH POWEE AND THOUGHT 147 either Christians or Mohammedans in military power for a lengthened period. Besides their political strength the adherents of Jesus and of Mohammed showed a religious enthusiasm unequalled by the believers of any other faith. The subjected Jews, being entirely under Christian and Moham- medan rule, for many centuries secretly maintained, but latterly have more openly revealed, their distrust of both Gospel and Koran, believing them unauthor- ised additions to their own Old Testament, the alleged foundation of each. The two new religions, while completely replacing the European Paganisms and the Arabian idolatry, left Judaism, though bitterly persecuted, to the preserving toleration of later times. Parseeism narrowly escaped total extinction by its Mohammedan supplanters, and is now regaining strength in its increasing number of votaries and in educational influence under British rule in western India. This singular revival is certainly a most interesting instance of a religious restoration after persecution. The more remote faiths, in a geographical sense, of Brahminism and its ' daughter ' Buddhism, survived in central and in eastern Asia, partly under British rule and partly under that of their own votaries. Few, if any, other religious faiths of L 2 148 BRITISH POWER AND THOUGHT importance now remain in the world. The stolid, uninquiring faiths of the Brahmins and Buddhists continue to be trusted by ignorant millions. Judaism appears as firm as ever, utterly unmoved by political change, while the warlike faith of Odin and the intellectual faith of Jupiter have yielded to Chris- tians, whose supremacy in the arts of peace and war worthily represent their brave and philosophical ancestry. Yet, unfortunately for mankind, ambition and the love of warfare almost for its own sake, together with constant political rivalry, prevail as much among Christian nations as among any others of ancient or modern times, though the spirit and letter of their faith decisively oppose these inclina- tions. In the time of Napoleon, when all Europe was Christian except a few provinces, the Trench and several other civilised nations rushed into warfare with each other as eagerly as if they were Pagans, find with very slight political excuse for inflicting its calamities on mankind. New weapons, a new mili- tary system, and different tactics indeed distinguished these comparatively modern warriors from a Pagan ancestry. But the terrible miseries of war, the wholesale destruction of human life, the maiming of surviving combatants, and the general desolation it BRITISH POWEE AND THOUGHT 149 spreads over the scenes of conflict must always be the same as in the earliest history. It may be hoped, however, that care of the sick or wounded and mercy to prisoners generally distinguish Christian armies from their savage predecessors, but in other respects the inevitable consequences of war are beyond the power of religion or of civilisation to change. In the desolation of plundered lands and cities, in the increased taxation, as well as in the terrible slaughter on the battlefield, the difference between ' civilised ' and savage warfare does not seem very perceptible. The ingenuity of modern times, more- over, is, and must be during warfare, specially devoted to inventing or perfecting the most fatal machines or instruments possible for the destruction of human life, already subject by natural laws to accidents and illness which often no wisdom or foresight can evade. The peculiar attractions also given to war, by belief in the glory of destroying political foes, and by the pleasure of wearing becoming or gorgeous uniforms, have always had great effect in rendering war popular, even to those who can only suffer, or run the risk of suffering, from it. It seems more consistent for the Jews to appeal to the God of 150 BRITISH POWER AND THOUGHT battles against His alleged foes, or for the Pagans to invoke the aid of Mars or of Odin, their gods of war, or for Mohammedans to recall their warlike prophet, than for the Christian Gospel to be expounded in such a way as to sanction warfare. Christianity, in its Founder's example, was peace itself, despite the utmost temptation to break it. He endured cruelty and insult without attempting any defence, far less aspiring to victory. It is evident that in this respect the example of Jesus can never be followed by His most sincere believers. Notwith- standing His wonderful influence over the few devoted men who knew Him, which evidently inspired them during the rise of Christianity with superhuman powers of endurance, yet when equally sincere Christians long afterwards came into political power they found it essential to their safety to often, in this respect, disregard the example of Jesus. War as determined, sometimes as relentless, as ever known in previous history has therefore been waged by most Christian nations, often against one another, during the progress of time, and its likelihood and popularity are suiSciently apparent throughout Europe at the beginning of this twentieth century. It is surprising that, this terrible scourge, alone BRITISH POWER AND THOUGHT 151 justified in Christian minds by the most absolute necessity, can be rendered positively attractive to most Christian nations, but it is certainly the fact. During the last hundred years the wars waged by Christians against each other and against non- Christians have probably been more numerous and cost a larger amount of himian life than during any part of recorded history that can be substantially verified. In the beginning of this twentieth century, despite the wars in South Africa, and with the Chinese in their own country, all European nations are at peace with each other. Yet this, it is to be feared, short-lived tranquilHty in Europe is accom- panied by the careful maintenance of immense standing armies in its chief countries. ' After eighteen hundred years' profession of the creed of Peace, Christendom is an armed camp. Never, or hardly ever, in times of peace had the mere preparations of war absorbed so large a propor- tion of its population and resources, and very seldom has so large an amount of its ability been maialy employed in maintaining and in perfecting instru- ments of destruction.' ' New warlike machines, new inventions for ' Lecky's Jlfop 0/ Life, chapter vii. 152 BEITISH POWER AND THOUGHT destroying human life in every conceivable way, are tried, and often adopted throughout Christian Europe with as much eager appreciation as if civilised Christians were surrounded by hostile savages, instead of by fellow-Christians alike claim- ing the credit of being civilised men. The passioh for warfare, or its necessity, perhaps the natural consequence, seems from historical proof to be really inseparable from human nature. Despite the various changes made, or supposed to be made, in mankind by the influence of different religions, it remains as firmly established among men now as in the days of Homer, or in those of the earliest records furnished by Jewish history. This fact is the more surprismg. when it is remembered that no religion has con- demned war or advocated peace so earnestly as the Christian, by the example as well as in the precepts of its Founder. Nearly all other faiths have usually celebrated victories over fellow-men in battle as among the glories to be desired by the human mind. Zoroaster is said to have died as a warrior on the battlefield. The Pagan and Scandinavian Deities even took part in war, and gloried in it, as did Mohammed, whose warlike triumphs over his fellow- countrymen finally established his faith in their BEITISH PO"WER AND THOUGHT 153 ancestral country. But Christianity was very different in its views of war. No praise or approval of either heroes or heroism was ever recorded as spoken by Jesus for the example or admiration of His followers, who were yet destined, as we now see, to be the chief rulers of the world. 164 BRITISH POWER AND THOUGHT CHAPTER XIII National enmity between Christian Powers — Success of Britain, France, and Russia in ruling non-Christian subjects. Op all the religious prophets recorded in history, the Christian Founder and the Buddha seem to have most condemned the spirit and practice of warfare. Their precepts, in this respect, entirely agreed with their personal examples. Yet the sincere followers of both have alike failed or been unable to obey these intimations rather than exact directions of their religious teachers. The Buddha is said to have died peacefully, after a quiet life spent in his own land, while the fate of Jesus was calculated to produce an exasperating effect on His subsequent followers when in power. His few precepts, read, expounded, often misunderstood by fallible men, had therefore slight effect in thoroughly implant- ing either feelings of mercy or the love of peace for its own sake, which He had so earnestly dis- BEITISH POWEE AND THOUGHT 155 played in His brief career. Though all Christians must read the account of the Crucifixion and the murder of the first Christian martyr, St. Stephen, •with indignation, these crimes, it should never be forgotten, were committed by well-meaning zealots. These acts of bigotry were fully equalled in their cruelty by the long subsequent perse- cutions, tortures, and cruel deaths inflicted by sincere Christians on each other, as well as on non- Christians. These atrocities, verified by Christian history, were often accompanied by the display of images and pictures of the Crucifixion, a recollection more likely to arouse feelings of vengeance than the forgiving mercy of its victim. Often in Christian history quotations from the Bible were used to justify executions of sectarian opponents, the party in power assuming that they themselves were doing the will of God, and that their foes were His also. These extraordinary hatreds, between even fellow- Christians, for a long period greatly influenced the conduct of the Christian Powers in the mediaeval history of Europe, as shown in their legislative enactments. In Napoleon's time, and for a consider- able period before it, these religious animosities had gradually yielded in political importance to those 156 BRITISH POWEK AND THOUGHT passions of personal ambition, love of power, and eager national enmity -whicli have always, more or less, accompanied and afflicted mankind. The history of England, as well as of other lands, is a complete illustration of the love of war, perhaps also of its absolute necessity. Her nearest neighbours were therefore the first foes. Scotland, Ireland, France, and Spain, long after they were Christian, were at war with England, but not united against her. Scotland's wars with England were nearly always confined to the Border, their common boundary, and while they were independent kingdoms the destruction of each other was not apparently contemplated. Their final union under one king was in every sense a peaceful political event, and no desire to again separate seems to have been ever shown by either kingdom. England's wars with France were long, obstinate, and sanguinary, but never ended in the complete con- quest of either, during a long period of national jealousy. England's intermittent warfare with Ireland ended in the latter's conquest, though not total subjection, as Ireland's whole strength was never at the service of an English sovereign. At first Irish resistance was confined to that of a few BEITISH POWER AND THOUGHT 157 tribes, never firmly allied under one king, and by degrees the numbers, energy, and loyalty of British colonists, chiefly in the north, always prevented Irish enmity being a thoroughly national sentiment. With Spain, England's hostility did not result in any important conquest, and practically ended with the destruction of the great Spanish fleet which attempted to invade England in the reign of Eliza- beth. While England and Scotland became united under one ruler, descended from the royal families of each country, and equally entitled by birthright to their respective allegiance, the Irish, having no recognised descendant of former kings who could aspire to be the national sovereign, yielded an uncertain, reluctant obedience to English and after- wards to British authority. The difference between Scotland and Ireland in their national rulers to some extent explains their respective ideas about British rule. The former Irish kings, or rather chiefs, do not seem to have acknowledged anyone in particular as the supreme monarch. The Scottish chiefs, on the contrary, despite their practical independence in some districts, never called them- selves absolute kings, and in theory always obeyed the royal family in Edinburgh, while their acknow- 158 BRITISH POWER AND THOUGHT ledgment of the Scottish monarchy was apparently seldom withheld. The political obedience of Ireland was of a singular, doubtful, almost a contradictory character. Eeligious influence in that country always overcame or directed its political or national aspirations. In no country in the world was clerical influence so popular or so deep-rooted. Its ancient Paganism, completely eradicated by the zeal, energy, and devotion of St. Patrick and subsequent Christian preachers, was replaced by Christianity as then transmitted by the views and authority of the Papacy. During the Eeformation, converting the greater part of Britain to Protestantism of differing forms, the Irish majority firmly retained Eoman Catholicism, while the British colonists in the north of Ireland mostly followed the changed views of their mother countries, England and Scotland. The mutual hostility between them and the native Irish had always been of a peculiarly implacable nature. Yet so strong was the influence of religious feeling among the Irish that at the last battle which perhaps could be called a national one, between Catholics and Protestants at the Boyne river, Irish Catholics appeared as virtually the deposed British BRITISH POWEE AND THOUGHT 159 king's last army, alone resisting the united forces of English, Scottish, and Irish Protestants united under a Protestant prince. All hopes of restoring Ireland under a native monarch were then abandoned by the Irish themselves. No successor to the renowned yet rather traditionary chief Brian Boru appeared to emulate his heroic expulsion of Danish invaders in a similar expulsion of the British. The opposing political interests of Christianity in differing forms had become the main objects in Ireland as in Britain, and to Eoman Catholicism, represented by the dethroned James II., all Irish Catholic sympathies were now devoted. At this period, when the Chris- tian camp was indeed rent in twain throughout the greater part of Europe, all non-Christians might naturally have anticipated the downfall or decay of the faith itself. Yet, when political peace was restored between opposing Christians, and their different countries became tranquil, some exulted in the triumph of Protestantism and others rejoiced in the successful retention of Catholicism, while Christianity in its chief doctrines and political history was believed in almost every civilised land. No faith may be said to have actually replaced the Christian in any part of the world. Though Mohammedanism 160 BRITISH POWER AND THOUGHT was of later origin, it arose and spread in countries which were not Christian, and its teaching, instead of denying Christianity, like that of the Jews, to a great extent acknowledged it. Yet by placing Mohammed in a more important position than Jesus, only because of his later coming, and from no natural superiority, this faith was for a long time denounced by zealous Christians with a vehement hatred for which there seems little justification from a Christian standpoint. These two religions continue to be the latest faiths that have obtained the confidence of mankind. The newly discovered worlds of America and Australasia, even the recent Asiatic and African explorations, throw little if any light on ancient religions except by a few of their artistic descriptions in Egypt and in Assyria. The ancient records, therefore, chiefly furnished by Asiatic and European study or research, have greatly engaged the time and thought of learned re- ligious inquirers in modern as in mediaeval times. In these labours of study, travel, and examination the nations of western Europe are foremost. The intellect of civilised man seems in the varied course of human history to have transferred itself more and more from the east to the west of the Old World. In BRITISH POWER AND THOUGHT 161 nearly all the exploits or achievements of discovery, translation, and elucidation, Europeans have watched and superintended the amazing researches during the nineteenth century in Assyria, Egypt, and Asia Minor. These renowned lands have revealed many oi the traditions, customs, or thoughts of the past, but their living inhabitants, while observing or labouring in these marvellous explorations, yet behold them in comparative ignorance. It is to European enterprise, chiefly British, German^ French, and Italian, that Asiatic and African races of the present time look for practical guidance, as well as for historical information about the lands which their ancestry inhabited for many centuries, yet which during the last hundred years have revealed so astonishing an amount of anti- quarian knowledge to the examining minds of learned Christian scholars. This information, hitherto, while most interesting or instructive to historians and to antiquarians, adds little or nothing new on the all- important subject of religious truth. This sublime study is alone rewarded in the Old and the New Testament, in the Koran, and in the obscure traditions of Zoroaster, of the Brahmins, and of the Buddha. In these various theological studies M 162 BRITISH POWEE AND THOUGHT seems comprised all the religious truth hitherto furnished to the inquiry of mankind. The faiths of Jupiter and of Odin disappeared without leaving believers in a single country, town, or village where once they were the supreme objects of the veneration of millions, among whom were certainly some learned and excellent men. Their extinct religions are now termed mere fables by triumphant Christians, or the mere inventions of fanciful men, without any truth. Yet this assertion, so confidently made and believed, may not dispel a doubt whether the Creator would have permitted or ordained that some of the best and wisest of men should live and die believing in merely ignorant falsehoods. These great men disappeared, many without ever having the chance of knowing any other faith. With them has vanished belief in their singularly interesting religion, while they transmit to a Christian posterity in their former lands most valu- able instruction in policy, legislation, and general philosophy upon nearly every subject that can improve mankind. Yet in giving religious informa- tion, all the wisdom, learning, and refinement of the classic Pagans have done absolutely nothing, ac- cording to Jewish, Christian, and Mohammedan belief. While most subjects of human interest were BRITISH POWER AND THOUGHT 163 examined, taught, or elucidated by the wisdom of the Greeks and Eomans, their ideas about religion have been unanimously pronounced by the civilised world to be only fables or fanciful notions, utterly worthless in the religious instruction of men. To Syria, Jews, Christians, and Mohammedans alike appealed for religious teaching, which they all thought more or less credible. Mohammedans certainly added the Koran to Judaism and to Christianity, but they believed to a great extent in the truth of both the last-named faiths. The beginning of the twentieth century now finds most of the civilised world believing steadily in one of these three religions, while the passive or indolent existing faiths in central and eastern Asia make comparatively slight progress, but do not show any decisive signs of decline. No candid unbeliever would deny the unrivalled Christian political supre- macy of the present time. Its prevalence seems hardly endangered in any country, and in fact appears more delayed or discouraged by rival Christian Powers than by any religious opponents. There are really no non-Christian Powers who are now very formidable to others. Though brave Mohammedan champions, like the Circassian chief Schamyl Bey in the Caucasus, and Abd-el-Kader in M 2 164 BRITISH POWEE AND THOUGHT Algiers, together with some Afghans and Sikhs, during the nineteenth century vainly opposed the Eussians, the French, and the British, yet their countries had alike to yield to the absolute power or indirect influence of Christian foes. In the begin- ning of the nineteenth century, during Napoleon's wars, when European Powers were arrayed against each other in long and sanguinary warfare, no non- Christians seemed able to avail themselves of these contests, and no country was rescued from Christian dominion. When European peace was for a time restored after the final defeat of Napoleon at Waterloo, nearly all the military strength of the world was in Christian hands, at least for invading purposes. No contem- plated attack on Europe by non-Christian armies has been seriously apprehended since that time, and such an enterprise at present seems an utter impossibility. The mutual jealousy between European nations, when their political power in Asia extends to China and Japan, with hardly a nation that is independent in its wide boundary, is an important fact. This jealousy is the more deplorable when it seems now the chief, if not sole, obstacle to the complete civilisation of the world. BRITISH POWER AND THOUGHT 165 The present changed policy of Christian nations from that of former times is practically the replace- ment of religious interests in warfare by political and commercial objects. This change may partly explain why Christian power and influence make far greater progress through the world than the Christian faith. The latter by no means accompanies the former, as might have been in a great degree expected. The diffusion of the faith seems really a secondary con- sideration to Christian rulers, which is a somewhat new fact in their history. A remarkable consequence of their altered policy is that non- Christian Asiatic and African subjects are freely enlisted in the service of their Christian rulers, with most satisfactory results. Britain, Russia, and France are now the countries whose influence over non-Christians, whether these be timid neighbours or obedient subjects, seems extending year by year. In such circumstances it might be hoped that religious dissensions in Christian lands between fellow-subjects would cease altogether. Yet they have not done so in Eussia and other parts of the Continent. Though legalised religious persecution no longer exists, there still remains an inconsistent spirit of prejudice, not only against Jews but against fellow- 166 BRITISH POWEB AND THOUGHT Christians, among some civilised men, even in Europe. Britain, however, it may confidently be hoped, is at length as just and tolerant as reasonable philan- thropists could wish to see, and her enlightening, beneficial influence seems to be more and more acknowledged, whether in colonial government, foreign policy, or domestic legislation. As in the case of the Eoman Empire, however, the benefits of British rule are sometimes more apparent in remote dominions than nearer to, or in the capital itself. While British laws, customs, and religious teaching promote civilisation in remote parts of Asia and of Africa, the Anarchist plots and the fraudulent con- spiracies in London are serious warnings to the home Government and to the general public not to reckon too confidently on moral improvement resulting from either increasing wealth or from educational superiority. BRITISH POWER AND THOUGHT 167 CHAPTEE XIV Christianity questioned by sceptical writers in Europe — Their failure in weakening its influence — Its paramount position in most civilised lands — Shakspere's fame and influence. Civilisation in Britain has perhaps been more than in other countries promoted by the influence of litera- ture. During a period when few could read or write there were conveyed to Britain, chiefly by Christian monks, the works of religious and secular teachers which gradually contributed to the education of the British mind in every department of social, philoso- phical, and religious knowledge. In British literature, however, it seems remarkable not only that the ancient faith of the country aroused no defender, but that little if any study was devoted to its explanation. It was apparently abandoned more thoroughly than the Greek Paganism, as a delusion not worth the trouble of examining. The earliest literary ideas or thoughts expressed by British writers chiefly pro- 168 BRITISH PO'WER AND THOUGHT ceeded from ecclesiastics whose minds, completely devoted to Christianity, found, or thought they found, more to despise than to praise or interest in the vanished faith of local ancestry. In this respect the Continental clergy had reason to differ from their British brethren. In the classic faith of Greece and of Eome the former found much to -admire and to in- spire interest, though not belief, in the noble literature describing it to an incredulous yet studious posterity in lands where it had reigned supreme for centuries. In the Paganism of ancient Britain and Scandinavia, the faith of Odin, Christian scholars discovered scarcely anything of interest to atone for what they thought its evident absurdity. It was therefore universally abandoned, more as a national disgrace or proof of former ignorance than as an intellectual pleasing fancy like the poetical faith of Jupiter. The energy, power, and talent of British literature when dealing with religion were enthusiastically devoted to spread or to strengthen Christianity for many centuries after its general adoption, till gradually a sceptical spirit arose which, while questioning and sometimes denying the whole or parts of that faith, yet never suggested belief in any other. No desire was ever shown to recall Judaism, or to revive the BEITISH POWEE AND THOUGHT 169 European Paganisms, the former being only the faith of a subjected, scattered race, and the latter utterly abandoned by the descendants of former believers. These new foes or doubters of Christianity, through the medium of British and foreign literature, seemed never to advocate a new or defend an old system of religious belief, but rather to suggest incredulity and then leave the subject. This new sort of opposition to an established popular creed, connected with one of the oldest religions in the world, had no general success, as it tended to merely make men gloomy or bewildered, without giving information or causing enlightenment. The Jews, moreover, though so long settled in European countries, never joined or were asked to join the sceptical opponents of Christianity. The national exclusive spirit of Judaism, resting on its peculiar historic Old Testament, when unen- lightened by its philanthropic Christian supplement of the New, was not likely to attract believers, except among faithful descendants of the alleged favoured race. The most brilliant as well as most profound Christian writers had little inducement to abandon their faith, which more than any other surviving religion permitted some degree of freedom in his- torical inquiry. Yet this comparative tranquillity in 170 BRITISH POWER AND THOUGHT religious thought was rather suddenly interrupted by the Protestant Eeformation, which vigorously attacked and was vigorously opposed by Eoman Catholicism. Some signs of this great movement had appeared in England before its partial success on the. Con- tinent. Of all the serious religious differences between Protestants and Catholics, the repudiation of the Papacy by the former was perhaps the most important in a political sense. The final success of Protestantism in Britain, its triumph, generally speaking, in northern Europe and failure in the south, greatly affected the British public mind. As a rule the literary talent of Britain became decidedly Protestant, though it may still appear doubtful whether Shakspere, the greatest of English writers before, during, and since his time, was a Protestant or a Catholic. Perhaps no English writers have had more critical examiners, critics, and reviewers. As time passes, Shakspere seems gaining rather than losing in the estimation of learned men. The opinions of Hume, Dr. Johnson, and Macaulay about him are interesting and probably instructive, yet those of Hume show a strange want of ordinary appreciation. He censures Shakspere for not alluding BRITISH POWER AND THOUGHT 171 more to the civil liberties of England.' He ap- parently forgets the brief yet most practical allusion to them in Cranmer's words at the christening of the Princess Elizabeth.^ ' The words I utter Let none think flattery, for they'U find 'em tnith. This royal infant (Heaven stUl move about herl), Though in her cradle, yet now promises Upon this land a thousand thousand blessings. In her days every man shall eat in safety Under his own vine, what he plants, and sing The merry songs of peace to all his neighbours. God shall be truly known, and those about her From her shall read the perfect ways of honour, And by those olaian their greatness, not by blood. This prophetic sketch in a few words indicated a time of civil and religious freedom in their most exalted sense. Dr. Johnson may overrate his own judgment and underrate the immortal genius he examines when he says : ' Shakspere with his excel- lencies has likewise faults, and faults sufficient to obscure and overwhelm any other merit.' Again the great critic writes : 'When he endeavoured to show how much his stores of knowledge could supply, he seldom escapes without the pity or resentment of his reader.' ' ' Appendix to Hume's History of England, vol. v. ' Henry VIII, ' Preface to Shakspere's works. 172 BRITISH POWER AND THOUGHT These exaggerated words are hardly worthy of Dr. Johnson's sagacity. The very deficiency in some branches of knowledge in Shakspere, owing to personal circumstances beyond his control, only displays his true greatness the more decisively by proving that his individual merits were those of his own nature, and owed little to educational assistance or scholastic information. The 'pity' or 'resent- ment' aroused by Shakspere's inevitable ignorance in Johnson's time among some readers certaiuly did not affect his subsequent reputation. Macaulay, probably knowing all the literature that Johnson knew, besides much more which the latter had never the means of acquiring, emphatically writes of Shakspere : ' Admirable as he was in all parts of his art, we most admire him for this, that while he has left us a greater number of striking portraits than all other dramatists put together, he has scarcely left us a single caricature. Shakspere has had neither equal nor second.' ' If Shakspere's works and those of Hume, Johnson, and Macaulay are compared, it might seem that in some respects he was both older and younger ' Essay on Madame D'Arblay. BRITISH POWER AND THOUGHT 173 than they in his ideas and mode of expressing them. He belonged to a time long previous to any of the three, yet many of his thoughts, views, and personal sketches apply nearly as much to the present period as to theirs or to his own. He is, in fact, neither old- fashioned nor modern in his ideas or style. He belongs, as far as his special genius is concerned, to no particular period of civilised history. Although thoroughly English in mind and thought, he is neither ancient, mediaeval, nor modern, but seems to ac- company and teach successive generations of his fellow countrymen with the same unequalled know- ledge of human nature. Hume and Hallam, most industrious and well known of English historians, alike blame him for alleged faults which they mention. If these so-called errors are examined, however, with due regard to Shakspere's personal circumstances or position, they may seem less glaring, if, indeed, they are errors at all. Hume, as before mentioned, censures him for not making John of Gaunt Duke of Lancaster praise the liberties of England as among the blessings of his country in his celebrated panegyric upon it. Hume apparently forgets that though ' old Lancaster ' may have loved England, he 174 BRITISH POWER AI^D THOUGHT was yet a royal prince living in a comparatively despotic period. It would hardly be natural for him to admire or encourage English freedom from the absolute control of his own family, of whom in peace and in war he was an eminent adherent. Shakspere, as a historical dramatist, had to carefully consider not only the characters he describes, but also the peculiar circumstances which were most likely to influence them. Hume seems in this instance to forget the political position and probable sentiments of John of Gaunt, which Shakspere evidently well remembered. Hallam, in his turn, blames the poet rather freely for attributing what he terms ' a stupid quibble ' to the Duke of York in ' Eichard the Second.' This ' quibble,' though perhaps stupid, may yet be understood by carefully recall- ing English history at the time. The new King, Henry IV., deposed his cousin, Eichard II., and had just returned from France to England, after banishment. Aumerle, son of York, and cousin to both kings, is accused of treason to the new King, and is a prisoner. York pretends to be implacably angry with his son, while the new King, who was always an able politician, is, or pretends to be, much BRITISH POWER AND THOUGHT 175 gratified at his uncle's loyalty, and the more disposed to forgive Aumerle. He exclaims : loyal father of a treacherous son I Thy overflow of good converts to bad ; And thy abundant goodness shall excuse This deadly blot in thy digressing son. York, in apparent rage at his son's treason, vehemently rejoins : Thou kill'st me in his life ; giving him breath. Then enters the Duchess with Aumerle, -who implore the King's clemency on their knees. Aumerle : Unto my mother's prayer I bend my knee. YorJc : Against them both my true joints bended be. Ill may'st thou thrive, if thou grant any grace 1 This extravagant loyalty his wife exposes, and thus tries to counteract : Duchess : Pleads he in earnest ? look upon his face. His words come from his mouth, ours from our breast ; He prays but faintly, and would be denied. Say — pardon, king ; let pity teach thee how : No word Uke pardon for kings' mouths so meet. Then comes a passage which Hallam calls atro- cious and contemptible. York, knowing that the King has lately heard French spoken all around him, 176 BEITISH POWEE AND THOUGHT of which the Duchess is ignorant, tries, in a coaxing way, to propitiate the King, and says, apparently in trembling jest : Speak it in French, king ; say, Pardonnez-moy. The mollified King, after a little more entreaty says : With all my heart I pardon him. The Duchess then exclaims in ecstasy : A god on earth thou art. while York says no more. Thus ends a strange scene, which may have been literally true from beginning to end, yet which might seem ridiculous unless the peculiar circumstances, as well as the characters of the period are carefully remembered. The ' quibble pardonnez-moi ' may certainly be stupid in itself, yet not inconsistent with York's character, and from what is known of that Prince, whom Hume calls ' a man of slender abilities, unfit for the high position he held,' would seem not unlikely for him to use. When it is re- membered also how much nearer Shakspere's time was to that of York, it is surely probable that the poet knew more about his real character than BRITISH POWEB AND THOUGHT 177 Hallam did. The ' stupid quibble,' therefore, is a charge for -which York may have been more responsible than Shakspere, if consistent with his character, which the poet had to describe in dramatic form. Shakspere's whole sketch of York seems curiously consistent. He is a nervous, eager, mis- judging man, constantly making mistakes, and at his wit's end, as he admits, when occupying the very trying position of being appealed to by his rival nephews, Eichard II. and Henry IV. When left by the former to rule England during his absence in Ireland, York is completely perplexed between duty to bis King and sympathy for his other nephew, and exclaims : If I know How, or which way, to order these affairs Thus thrust disorderly into my hands, Never believe me. All is uneven, And everything is left at six and seven. In fact, weak-minded, flighty people, if naturally represented, must be described often saying foolish things, which poets and historical novelists have surely the right to freely introduce. But when Macaulay declares that Shakspere has neither equal nor second, N 178 BEITISH POWER AND THOUGHT and then says that Miss Austen has approached nearest to the manner of the great master, the admirers of Sir Walter Scott may perhaps be allowed to remonstrate. The spirit, tendency, and moral philosophy of Shakspere's historical plays and of Scott's Waverley novels present surely a far stronger resemblance in apparent purpose and in peculiar power. In these unequalled sketches of life and character, in prose or in verse, in which historic and imaginary characters are so remarkably combined, historic facts as well as personages are alike described with a power never approached by either poet or novelist since their time. Many highly gifted English poets and novelists have been famous since their period, some ait least possessing far more information about many subjects, owing to the lessons of time, than Shakspere, or even Scott, had the means of acquiring- Their rare peculiar talents in this branch of literature, when uniting the real with the fanciful, without violating historic truth while rendering it more clear and reasonable to general readers, belong to no special period of time, nor can their lasting value be affected by its changes. The historic characters described by most historians as mere formal personages, perhaps accurately BRITISH POWER AND THOUGHT 179 described and thoughtfully examined, are by Shak- spere and Scott endowed with life and reality. They are described as if by some personal acquaintance. Similar exploits in literature, or attempts at them, have been performed, but never with the same success — at least in. Britain. Shakspere and Scott portray British kings and statesmen in a manner which makes readers almost know them. They appear transmitted as if from some careful diary of an acquaintance taking down their words, and observing personally their manner, dress, and way of speaking. This power of representation seems the special gift of these two writers, in which they not only have never been equalled, but as yet not much resembled. It is their rare and most pleasing gift to combine the real with the romantic, to describe the facts and personages transmitted by historic knowledge brightened and enlivened, yet never misrepresented by the power of a self-controlled imagination. In their historical descriptions or allusions, it may be said that the taste, talent, and knowledge of the antiquarian, the novelist, and the historian are most instructively and rarely united. Hence the likely reason of their lasting charm, value, and superiority. Admirable writers of fiction — 180 BEITISH POWER AND THOUGHT Dickens, Thackeray, Bulwer Lytton— and many IDrofound or learned historians and poets, have recently attracted the British public more than. ever since the increased diffusion of literature. But to unite history with fancyj to mingle sensational interest with the instruction of- historical truth in British literature, are the special achievements of Shakspere and of Scott alone. In this intellectual exploit they remain unsurpassed, and to a great extent imresembled, notwithstanding the immense educational advantages of their literary successors. The rare, peculiar power of describing people naturally does not seem to belong always to writers who were yet the most personally acquainted with human nature. Disraeli and Bulwer Lytton, for instance, whose political lives involved great personal knowledge of men, never describe them with the truthfulness of Scott, Dickens, and Thackeray. The powers of accurate observation possessed by these three evidently surpassed all other advantages, enabling them to invent characters which continue | to delight and to interest wherever the English language is spoken. BRITISH POWER AND THOUGHT 181 CHAPTER XV Shakspere's caution in describing historical characters — His freedom from party spirit when introducing English civil wars— Milton's political vehemence a great contrast to him — Gibbon's dislike to the intolerance of Christians when in political power. There are very few of the same historic personages in Shakspere's plays and in Scott's novels. As a rule the poet and the novelist chose different periods of British history to illustrate. Young Prince John in Scott's ' Ivanhoe,' plotting, suspicious, and flattering, much resembles him as the treacherous, artful King in Shakspere's play. Margaret of Anjou, the fierce, heroic princess in the poet's ' Henry VI.,' is naturally enough borne out in the aged, saddened Queen in Scott's ' Anne of Geierstein.' With these exceptions, and perhaps a few others of less note, there are no historical characters described by both these authors. A remarkable characteristic of each seems the calm, just way in which they alike describe religious and political opponents and partisans. Shakspere, in ' Eichard II.' and in ' Henry IV.,' makes these rival 182 BRITISH POWER AND THOUGHT kings so interesting that it might be hard to say which he really prefers. In ' Henry VIII.' the rival queens, Katharine of Aragon and Anne Boleyn, are described as if from accounts given by their personal friends. Even King John claims some pity, despite his odious character, at the end of the play which bears his name. His last words, when death is hastened by hearing the loss of his army, are very pathetic when well delivered on the stage. He exclaims to Falconbridge, who hastens to tell the news : My heart hath one poor string to stay it by, Which holds but till thy news be uttered ; And then all this thou see'st is but a clod And module of confounded royalty. Eichard III. is perhaps the king whom above all other Shakspere detests, and wishes readers to detest, while his foe Eichmond, afterwards Henry VII., only appears at the very end of the play as a victorious young hero delivering England from a dangerous tyrant. Eichmond's grand speech ending the play is hardly consistent with the cold, selfish character of this prince. It is, however, admirably fitted, by its bright, energetic promise of a happy future to England, at the end of the civil war, to close a tragedy so BEITISH POWER AND THOUGHT 183 terribly full of crime, yet so lifelike and exciting as that of Eichard III. : — England hath long been mad and scarr'd herself; The brother blindly shed the brother's blood, The father rashly slaughter'd his own son. The son, compeU'd, been butcher to the su-e ; All this divided York and Lancaster, Divided in their dire division. — O now, let Hichmond and EUzabeth, The true succeeders of each royal house. By God's fair ordinance conjoin together ! And let their heirs (God, if thy wiU be so ! ) Enrich the time to come with smooth faced peace, With smiling plenty, and fair prosperous days ! Now civil wounds are stopp'd, peace lives again ; That she may long live here, God say. Amen. Shakspere's historical plays, when alluding to the Christian divisions in England, are very guarded in their language. In ' King John,' certainly, the Pro- testant spirit seems to appear when Papal authority is denounced. Yet this denunciation is uttered by -an artful, wicked sovereign in words which he probably could never have used, and whose ideas on religion, if he had any, would have been as worthless as his character. In Cardinal Pandulph, Shakspere carefully describes the political policy of the Papacy throughout all Christian kingdoms at that period. 184 BRITISH POWER ANI) THOUGHT This prelate should be studied as one whose whole life, energy, and duty were alike devoted to the in- terests of that only branch of Christianity which he believed could obtain salvation. It is an error to impute to him the worldly, trivial motives of ordi- nary men. Pandulph is in himself partly a dictator, partly almost a slave. As the Pope's emissary he exhorts and commands, but when his Church's in- terests are not concerned his efforts and sympathies cease immediately. Hume is likely mistaken when attributing to such a Inan feelings of mere personal pride when obtaining King John's submission to Papal authority, not to his own. ' The legate could not forbear discovering extravagant symptoms of joy and exultation. He trampled on the money which was laid at his feet, an insolence of which no one present dared to take any notice.' ' The real truth was that at this period only the Papacy had the power to restrain or influence tyrannical Christian kings. The feelings of the English nation at this time were on the side of the Cardinal, who was supported secretly by public opinion.^ As Macaulay observes, ' The childhood of the European nations was passed under ' Hume's History of King John. ' Green's History of the English People. BRITISH POWER AND THOUGHT 183 the tutelage of the clergy. The priests, -with all then- faults, were by far the wisest portion of society. It was, therefore, on the whole good that they should be respected and obeyed.^ ' In Shakspere's account of the civil wars of the Koses, in ' Henry VI.' and ' Richard III.,' the poet arouses admiration, pity, or interest for nearly all the chief men of both parties. Their heroism, lofty sentiments, and personal devotion to what each believes a right cause claim the sympathies of all readers, while, unlike many historical writers, Shakspere invests men who are mortal enemies to each other with equal interest. His readers will generally admire or pity victors and vanquished on both sides during the calamitous civil wars he describes, being alike made interesting whether in triumph or defeat. Shakspere views them as if personally free from preference or prejudice, and describes his fellow-Englishmen durmg times of the most terrible agitation and excitement with the calmness of an observer knowing their different qualities, thoughts, and motives, while exempt from their weaknesses. Again, in 'Henry VIII.,' when describing a period near his own, the disputes between Eoman Catholics and Protestants in England are ' History of England, vol. i, 186 BRITISH POWEE AND THOUGHT described with such peculiar ability and caution that, to borrow his own words in ' King Lear,' ' curiosity in neither can make choice of either's moiety.' The King, a sudden, eager convert to Protestantism, the Catholics, Queen Katharine and Cardinal Wolsey, with the Protestants, Anne Boleyn and Cranmer, would have surely been pleased with Shakspere's descriptions of themselves, but perhaps have denied that of each other as being too favourable. Shak- spere is always such a patriotic Englishman that illustrious English people, of whatever creed or party, he can describe with just pride and interest which raise him above prejudice or unfairness in estimation. His great poetical successor, Milton, writing in a very different period of their country's history, was not only an ardent Protestant, but nearly as intolerant towards some fellow-Protestants as towards Eoman Catholics. His time was during a most important political as well as religious change in Britain and in parts of Ireland, The British monarchy, then including Scotland as well as Ireland, the former b| cordial union, the latter by enforced, yet disputed rule in its greater part, was overthrown for the first time in history by a domestic revolution, and a form of government that at first seemed, but only seemed. BRITISH POWER AMD THOUGHT 187 a republic was substituted in its stead. But this nominal republic was really nothing of the kind. Its triumph had been mainly won by the military genius, valour, and wisdom of Oliver Cromwell, who after totally defeating the royal forces in the name of the Eepublic whose general he was, soon deprived his nominal masters of all power, and supported by a peculiarly valiant, devoted soldiery, became practically the almost absolute ruler of the three kingdoms. In fact a brave minority in Britain had abolished the monarchy, while Cromwell's subsequent triumph over his original employers, the leaders of the Common- wealth, was never resisted either by the conquered Eoyalists or by whatever remained of republicanism in Britain. A republic in its true sense was not at this time, and apparently never was before or since, popular with the British majority. It was a form of government which, though successful in ancient times, had been little known throughout Europe since the political establishment of Christianity. Zealous preachers and ardent monarchists often associated this faith with the monarchical system as the most approved in Heaven's sight. ' Fear God, honour the King ' was a maxim frequently uttered, and usually respected. Nearly all Europe since the 188 BRITISH POWER AND THOUGHT establishment of Christianity was composed of different kingdoms, often imbued with national jealousy or anti- pathy, but rarely inclined to try the republican system. Evidently Cromwell himself, the foe of British mon- archy, had really little sympathy with true republican principles. ' The will of the people ' it generally was clearly not his desire to obey, though he may have used his short-lived power over them to the best advantage. Upon this point there has always been great difference of opinion between able writers on history. His illustrious adherent, Milton, though called a republican, evinced a personal admiration for Cromwell, and a complete submission to what he termed his sole authority, which more resembled the spirit of hero-worship than that of a consistent republi- can, Cromwell himself not only almost absolutely ruled a faction which had originally employed him to defend their liberties against an alleged tyrant, but desired to leave his authority to his son Eichard, who had neither the ability nor the inclination to rule. It seems evident that Cromwell wished to preserve the monarchical system, though transferred from the defeated House of Stuart to the victorious one of Cromwell. The spirit of the British majority, however, never really sympathised with Cromwell's BRITISH POWER AKD THOUGHT 189 triumph, though his gi-eat genius and valour had not only achieved but confirmed his success in the enforced obedience of his subjects during his energetic life. But when this great man had ' lived the lease of nature, and paid his breath to time and mortal custom,' the Stuart monarchy was soon restored, though represented by a prince devoted to frivolous, selfish pleasures, and practically indifi'erent about his subjects, whom he neither loved nor hated. During this restoration of kingly power, under either Crom- well when styled Protector, or under Charles II. as King, no republican resistance, or even demonstra- tion, seems to have occurred throughout Britain. Eeligious quarrels at this period in the British Isles greatly influenced the political strife. The Indepen- dents, a sect never before or since very powerful, obtained under such a leader as Cromwell a complete but brief ascendancy. The Puritans became supreme in Scotland, though often differing with the ruling Independents in England. The subjected Prelatists as a rule were Eoyalists, while the Eoman Catholics in England were not only few, and still fewer in Scotland at this time, but were distrusted by all Protestant sects, even amid their quarrels among themselves. 190 BRITISH POAVER AND THOUGHT They were almost entirely Eoyaliats, and par- ticularly obnoxious to Cromwell's party. In Ireland the Roman Catholic majority vehemently resisted Cromwell, not so much as loyalists to the English monarchy, as because they dreaded the triumph of such a foe. The Irish Protestant colonists, chiefly in the north, being Royalist in principle, viewing the English sovereigns as their special protectors or patrons, were bitterly reproached by Cromwell's literary advocate, Milton, for opposing, though not actually resisting, the ruling party in Britain. His dispute with the Belfast Presbyterians was a singular episode in those disturbed times, and deserves per- haps more attention than it has received. Yet despite their differences with the ruling Independents, the Irish Protestants, whether Prelatists or Puritans, were soon forced, though unwUlingly, to support Cromwell for the sake of his protecting them, with the full force of the English army, from the Irish Catholic majority. The religious interests of the latter guided them far more than any political con- sideration, owing to their peculiar history and the subjected position of their faith. Cromwell thus finally triumphed over every political opponent in Britain and in Ireland, and his success confirmed for BKITISH POWEE AND THOUGHT 191 a short time the rule of the Independents. But their ascendancy perished with Cromwell. When he was gone they reverted to what they were before his rise to power, and became again a by no means numerous or influential sect, while in England and in Scotland the Episcopal and Presbyterian faiths became dominant. During these constant quarrels between many Christian divisions, Catholics, Prelatists, Puritans, and Independents, who when excited by political enmity often seemed to lose sight of the spirit of Christianity itself, the English Jews, by denying it altogether, found themselves better treated than ever in England. The fierce denunciations exchanged between most Christian sects at this time gradually caused a singular change in that faith's political history. The long-subjected Jews, who had so zealously tried to suppress Christianity at its first appearance, had for many a century been silent from generation to generation upon the dangerous subject of religion. Their ancestral enmity, therefore, gradually diminished through the lapse of centuries, and be- came less remembered by opposing fellow-Christians, who, striving for political ^ower and dreading 192 BRITISH POWER AND TIIOUaST persecution from each other, came to regard Jewish hostility as a mere record of ancient history, no longer to be feared amid the dangers threatening them from differing sects of their own faith. During the first struggles of the Eeformation the Christian divisions abhorred each other's alleged errors to such an extent as to sometimes deny that those differing from them were Christians at all. They declared that salvation, once supposed the exclusive possession of Christianity, was restricted now to differing sections of it. This gloomy and practically cruel belief proved the bane of many civilised countries for a long period. It seems first to have arisen in Europe when the declining Paganisms had yielded altogether to the new faith, and when the scattered, helpless Jews represented the only other religion in it. At this time the rejection of Chris- tianity by Pagans and by Jews, though for such dif- ferent reasons, was thought by, Christian zealots to ensure future condemnation irrespective of any sin or offence against existing laws. This sincere in- tolerance prevalent in the early days of Christian political power, and which lasted long after its per- manent establishment, greatly disgusted the eminent historian Gibbon. In his celebrated history of the BRITISH POWER AND THOUGHT 193 decline of the Eoman Empire, he almost regrets the replacement of Paganism by Christianity, without intimating the least faith in the former. The in- tolerance of some Christians, emerging from persecu- tion themselves, when first in political power, and the refined learning and wisdom of some Pagan writers of old, apparently influence Gibbon's mind or judgment. His sarcasms about the early days of triumphant Christianity made him thought more a foe to it than he really was, in the opinions of some learned modern writers. 'If Gibbon were writing now, the tone of his candid and rational inquiry would certainly be difi'erent. He would be affected by that merely historical point of view which is a note of the present century, and its larger tolerances, and more than half disarmed by that wide diffusion of unobtru- sive scepticism among educated people which seema to render offensive warfare superfluous.' ' In his estimation of the various characters, motives, and deeds with which he deals. Gibbon writes from a moral standpoint worthy of Christianity, and which, though certainly not confined to that faith, is quite consistent with its teaching. His great work was not only translated into many European ' Bury's Introduction to Gibbon's History, published 1896. 194 BRITISH POWER AND THOUGHT languages, but is to this day consulted by foreigners as well as by Englishmen, and even by some Mo- hammedan writers. His dislike to the Jews, usually revealed in quiet sarcasm, and his favourable sketch of Mohammed and his religion, are remarkable, and were likely to give more offence than he probably expected to many civilised Christian and Jewish readers, while in his time few Mohammedans were acquainted with his partial admiration for their rather maligned Prophet. BRITISH POWER AND THOUGHT 196 CHAPTEK XVI Gibbon among the first English writers who describe Mohammed without prejudice — Hume's English History more devoted to describing the different kings than to the general state of England — Milton's poetical excellence contrasted with the coarse violence of some of his prose works — Scott's opinion of the Satan of Milton, contrasted with the Mephistopheles of Goethe. The full value of Gibbon's Eoman history has been greatly appreciated during the last few years. Many leading English newspapers, the ' Times ' among them, have owned the advantage of going ' back to Gibbon ' for varied and instructive information. He is perhaps one of the first, if not the very first, of English his- torians who ever wrote favourably of Mohammed and his faith, and in this respect he is resembled by several recent European writers and travellers. Gibbon is praised, almost gratefully, by modern Mohammedan writers, who naturally contrast his large-minded, tolerant sketch of their Prophet with the ignorant bigotry formerly expressed or displayed by Christian o 2 196 BRITISH POWER AND THOUGHT preachers, warriors, and rulers about him. Perhaps, however, personal feelings scarcely known to the general public may have rather actuated Gibbon in his relative remarks on Jews, Christians, and Mohammedans. In his time he had to encounter the silent opposition or the keen criticism of the two first- named, while in describing remote Mohammedans, who were then not much known in England, he met with little censure or suspicion. Yet readers may be surprised at Gibbon's admiration for some Pagan ideas and thoughts, and also to find him think so well of Mohammedanism ; for two religious or philosophical systems could hardly be more opposed in every sense to each other than the classic Paganism and the faith of Mohammed. They were fated never to come in contact ; the one had vanished before the other arose, and Gibbon, calmly writing under the protection of Christian rule, had nothing to apprehend from the votaries of either. But from peaceful though some- times bigoted or narrow-minded Jews and Christians Gibbon evidently encountered both open censure and silent disapproval. He is specially careful and in- terested in all relating to Eoman laws, acknowledged by English legal men as in great measure the founda- tion of their own. In this important department of BRITISH POWEE AND THOUGHT 197 social life Gibbon shows that the Eomans certainly excelled previous or contemporary nations. It may be surprising to modern readers that so imagina- tive and poetical a people, in their religious ideas and artistic tastes, were yet thoroughly practical or matter-of-fact in all relating to their own material welfare and to that of their numerous, various, and well-governed subjects. In dwelling on the Eoman character, as in every- thing else connected with Eoman rule. Gibbon is both diligent and evidently highly interested. Yet his great History was far more valuable to learned men than likely to be popular with the many, and seems to have been written more to instruct Europeans generally than his own fellow-countrymen exclusively. Gibbon was evidently, as Bacon predicted of his own works, more appreciated by after ages than by his own. In many ways Gibbon's historical inquiries were evidently suited to the enterprising spirit of the nineteenth century, as is shown by the renewed or confirmed confidence placed in them. His historic contempo- rary Hume, to whom he courteously alludes, rather resembles him in evincing a sceptical spirit about Christianity, indicated even in his English History. Hume's views on this subject, like Gibbon's, seem 198 BRITISH POWER AND THOUGHT greatly caused by his aversion to that spirit of intoler- ance, amounting to practical injustice, which so many of its chief votaries displayed. His calm, reasoning mind, devoid of much enthusiasm for anything or anybody, made him examine human history with extreme coolness, care, and consistency. But when alluding to religious conception, or to poetic excel- lence, as in the case of Shakspere, his judgment seems to fail him, and he, to use a common phrase, gets out of his depth altogether. His criticisms or opinions in these instances seem really unworthy of his abilities. Neither the superhuman wonders inti- mated by religious belief of any kind nor the intel- lectual glory of Shakspere's genius arouse much respect, interest, or admiration in Hume. He was essentially, if not exclusively, a thoroughly matter-of- fact writer, comparing in his quiet thoughtful mind many different men and the course of English his- torical events, weighing one proof of credibility against another, and finally bringing everything to the test of his own judgment, m the accuracy of which he seems to have reposed implicit faith. His whole life and conduct were those of a modest, humane, judi- cious man, but who was inclined ' to measure the sky itself by a foot-rule,' owing to the undoubted success of BRITISH POWEE AND THOUGHT 199 that instrument in lesser exploits. Though opposing Roman Catholicism, he shows no particular partiality for any form of Protestantism. Yet these Christian divisions engrossed Britain and Ireland in their contending beliefs during part of the British history he describes. He examines the different characters of English and British sovereigns with perhaps too exclusive care, considering the little he says comparatively of the national progress or condition under their rule. Among the weakest of his chapters is where he deals with literature and criticises Shakspere. The poet's unequalled genius is evidently beyond Hume's power to appreciate or thoroughly understand. His strange censure of Shakspere as a dramatic writer has been entirely refuted in theatrical history during the last century. Never before were Shakspere's plays represented in their national proper home of the London stage with more care, expense, and exact- ness of detail, whether in dress, scenery, or furniture, and Shakspere's language, moreover, instead of be- coming antiquated, or hard to understand, is to this day selected for expressing with most felicitous power suitable descriptions as to works of charity, muni- ficence, or special generosity. In his account of 200 BRITISH POWEE AND THOUGHT English sovereigns, in those historic plays which Hallam terms ' dramatic chronicles,' Shakspere's resemblance to Hume in opinion of historical cha- racters is generally evident. Similar views about these personages are often expressed in the cold, rather dry style of the prose historian, and in the lifelike, brilliant descriptions of the immortal poet. Yet it may be sometimes said of Shakspere's historic characters, as Dr. Johnson said of Pope's translation of Homer, that some poetic beauties appear in the translation, which in the original are not to be found. ^ In the plays of ' King John ' and of ' Henry VIII.' the grand language ascribed to both kings is likely far superior to what the gloomy, suspicious John, or the fiery, impetuous Henry could have used, except, perhaps, in the case of the latter on rare occasions. Shakspere, without in essential points violating or much altering historic accuracy, has the rare talent of exalting, though not absolutely changiag, the people he describes, and this gift is one of his greatest. His liking for monarchy is very evident. 'His ideal England,' as has been well observed, ' is an England grouped around a noble king.' ^ Even the slaying of ' Dr. Johnson's Life of Pope. ' Green's History of the English Feeble. BRITISH POWER AND THOUGHT 201 the half-starved rebel Jack Cade elicits no sympathy from Shakspere, whose sarcastic account of the ignorant mob following Cade would gratify as well as amuse every loyalist of his time. It is impossible to decide what Shakspere would have thought of the Cromwellian party and of their victorious leader. Yet there are many signs, none of course amounting to actual proof, that he would have been warmly on the side of the Royalists. In many instances, when mentioning kings, governments, and revolutionists, he resembles his literary successor. Sir Walter Scott, in preferring to support existing rule. It may, therefore, be doubted if Shakspere would have been complimented as ' sweetest Shakspere, Fancy's child ' by the eloquent and vehement Cromwellian poet, Milton, had these greatest of English poets ever conversed on the exciting subject of their nation's politics. It was fated, however, that they should never meet in this world, and their admiring fellow-countrymen must draw their own ignorant, yet perhaps correct, conclu- sions as to how they would have agreed or disagreed. Yet it is sufficiently evident that they dearly loved England, and desired her prosperity in every con- ceivable way. That Shakspere's liking for the 202 BRITISH POWER AND THOUGHT monarchical system was always shared by the majority of his fellow-countrymen is evident enough. Its general popularity throughout England has always been shown in a greater or less degree, and especially among the people of London. The energy and genius of Cromwell never made him popular there, though his great abilities won and maintained his power to the last. These facts his modern admirers have fully admitted. The national rejoic- ing at the restoration of monarchy, and the enthusi- astic welcome accorded to such a prince as Charles II., prove decisively that the monarchical system was dearly loved in England, even when represented by a selfish, undistinguished, profligate king. A republic really never had a fair trial in either Britain or Ireland, where kings, queens, and chiefs have always ruled, often engaged in wars with other kings, but rarely, if ever, disturbed by what could be called a republican opposition. Hume in this respect, like Shakspere, was a thorough monarchist in his views, and when reviewing the career of the unfortunate Charles I. his usual calmness almost yields to a half- suppressed eagerness in praising that ill-fated monarch. The lasting difference in British estima- tion of this king and of Cromwell, in their conduct BRITISH POWER AND THOUGHT 208 to'Wards the nation, is very remarkable, and remaina not much changed by the course of time. During Cromwell's life, Britain certainly submitted to him completely, yet with the brilliant exception of his great admirer, the illustrious Milton, it seems doubtful if many literary or intellectual Englishmen or Scotsmen were really pleased with the rule of this almost despotic soldier. The odious, disgraceful insults offered to his memory by publicly hanging his skeleton, the deliberate executions of his fellow regi- cides, and the frantic welcome of Charles II. prove that Cromwell was by no means viewed as a deliverer from tyranny ; though this noble title is accorded to him now by some of his fellow-countrymen. The idea of erecting his statue close to the Houses of Parliament, lately carried into effect under the auspices of a monarchical government, would likely have met with general indignation during many years after his death. It required a considerable time, and also the reigns of some unpopular sovereigns, to elapse before the memory of this extraordinary man gradually became the subject of honour and of respect in a city where his rule had been so openly detested. The minds of some of the wisest Englishmen have always been divided about Charles I. and Cromwell, 204 BEITISH POWER AND THOUGHT and still continue to be so, judging from the views of even recent historical writers. Cromwell was the ideal hero of Milton, who in his turn became the subject of Dr. Johnson's able satire. As the poet complains in ' Paradise Lost ' of falling on evil days, and being by evil tongues surrounded, since the restoration of the monarchy, Johnson, well knowing Milton's political bitterness expressed in his prose works, declares that ' for him to complain of evil tongues required impudence equal to his other powers.' Johnson's keen censure was greatly blamed afterwards by the mild poet Cowper, and more recently by the enthusiastic Lord Macaulay. The two last, however, seem so captivated by the immortal poet's genius that they appear inclined to excuse his prose language altogether. Yet, notwith- standing his admirable poetry, the ferocity with which he writes that in executing Charles I. 'the only grief was that the head was not struck off to the better advantage of those who held it by the hair ' is hardly worthy of a Christian writer ; but, despite his implacable ' party spirit,' Milton was a sincerely religious man, though embittered by its evil influence during his excited times. His splendid verses in ' Paradise Lost ' and ' Paradise Regained ' are always BRITISH POWEE AND THOUGHT 205 the delightful study especially of theological readers. His ' Comus ' and ' Samson Agonistes ' express the same devout spirit ; yet his idea of Satan in ' Paradise Lost ' seems more like a defeated noble general, proud and rebellious, while pitying not only his followers, but even his first human victim. Eve, than the Father of Evil, the ideal and origin of all sin. Sir Walter Scott believes that Goethe's Mephisto- pheles more likely resembles the invisible Eeality than Milton's nobler creation. Goethe's idea in ' Faust ' is that of a being incapable of the least good feeling, but only existing for the purpose of increasing or arousing moral wickedness among mankind. This opinion Scott expresses in his preface to 'Quentin Durward,' a novel written chiefly to describe King Louis XI. of France. This strange, partly fanatical, partly hypocritical character has been represented on the London as well as on the Paris stage with eminent success, and Scott says that there is some- thing in this king's evil influence among his subjects which recalls to him the fiend of Goethe's imagina- tion. In Milton's Satan there certainly seems less hardened wickedness than is to be found among some real historical characters or among criminals even at the present time. Nothing, except perhaps in 206 BRITISH POWER AND THOUGHT a dream, can exceed the complete incarnation of evil comprised in Goethe's terrible conception. Any kind of remorse, a feeling conspicuous in the demon of 'Paradise Lost,' would be utterly inconsistent with the spirit or evident nature of Mephistopheles. Milton, in his beautiful poems ' L'Allegro ' and ' II Pen- seroso,' describes many of the pleasures and griefs of human life in a style as suitable to foreigners as to Englishmen. In these poems the irritating effect of the troubled politics during his time disappears alto- gether, and he reverts to the intellectual pleasures of the fine arts : Then to the well-trod stage anon, If Jonson's learned sock be on, Or sweetest Shakspere, Fancy's child, Warble his native wood notes wild. And ever against eating cares Lap me in soft Lydian airs, . . . In notes with many a winding bout Of linked sweetness long drawn out With wanton heed and giddy cunning ; The melting voice through mazes running, Untwisting all the chains that tie The hidden soul of harmony.' He is here in the peaceful realms of art and literature alone with his mighty genius, praising ' L'Allegro. BRITISH POWER AND THOUGHT 207 Shakspere's plays, and vocal music, as among the delights of intellectual life, and in poetry which may well arouse the admiration of cultivated men, of whatever nation, creed, or politics. Milton's description of music evidently means the Italian style, with which he may have been delighted during his journey in Italy, as in his time little, if any, of it was heard in England. It was Milton's fate to belong to a political party which, as a rule, neither shared nor approved of his intellectual tastes. His admiration for Shakspere would scarcely have gratified many of his Independent partisans. Scott knew this well, and describes an Independent soldier, following Cromwell, denouncing Shakspere's works, which he discovers in a Eoyalist's house : ' Verily I say that since the devil fell from heaven he never lacked agents on earth ; yet nowhere hath he met with such a wizard having such infinite power over men's souls as this pestilent fellow Shakspere. This book is the well-head and source of all those evils which have overrun the land like a torrent. Away with him, men of England, to Tophet with his wicked book.'' Milton's impla- cability towards political opponents apparently pre- ' Woodstock, chap. iii. 208 BRITISH POWER AND THOUGHT ceded and outlasted the religious prejudices which occasioned it. The cruelties of James II.'s rule, and the terrible warfare waged for and against him in Ireland, were alike inspired by religious animosity, though turned to different directions. The long previous enmity of English invaders of Ireland and the natives was caused by national hostility, un- mingled with any religious feeling. They alike professed the same Christianity, the opposing forms of which faith, in later years, rivalled each other in their religious intolerance. BRITISH POWER AND THOUGHT 209 CHAPTER XYII Remarkable position of William III. opposed by some Prelatifits and Presbyterians in Britain, and by Roman Catholics in Ireland — His policy more just and far-seeing than that of Cromwell — The Jacobite revolts of 1715 and 1745 — Scott's views about them in his Waverley Novels. During Charles II. 's reign England and Ireland were comparatively little disturbed. In Scotland, fellow-Protestants, Prelatists, and Presbyterians were involved in a short war of peculiar interest, ending in the apparent victory of the former, aided by the English forces, but which, in its final result, led to the supremacy of the Presbyterians, when Scottish national opinion was consulted by the succeeding government of William III. This monarch, though personally calm, unimpassioned, and sagacious, had the strange fate of having to combat some English Prelatists, some Scottish Presbyterians, and the Irish Catholic majority, alike opposing him, ' though not in actual alliance. Yet these various foes were peculiarly opposed to p 210 BRITISH POWER AND THOUaHT one another, as proved by their pohtical history. When, therefore, a cautious, unsympathetic, tolerant king ruled them, he naturally had to oppose the most extreme of all these parties, while his main support depended on the more moderate Prelatists and Presbyterians. The Eoman Catholics, whether British or Irish, could not reasonably have been expected to willingly obey William III. He replaced the deposed King, James II., whose chief offence to a large majority of non-Catholic subjects was his trying to restore Eoman Cathohcism to political supremacy. The British Eoman Catho- lics, however, were too few to offer open resistance ; but in Ireland the Catholic majority were his most energetic and consistent foes. William, though urged by endangered and vehement Irish Protestants to oppress the defeated Irish Catholics in every way, and thus follow their example, by no means imitated the policy of his victorious predecessor, Cromwell, in Ireland, though these great rulers occupied a very similar position in that island. William, though a decided Protestant, was constantly observing the interests of Protestants throughout the Continent, as well as in Britain and Ireland. His policy therefore towards Irish Eoman Catho- BRITISH POWER AND THOUGHT 211 licism was different from that of Cromwell, from political rather than from religious motives. Crom- well, who was never on the Continent, had, despite his amazing genius, some of the local prejudices of an untravelled, in some respects an uneducated. Englishman. He viewed the native Irish as hardly better than savages, who, though professed Eoman Catholics, had little really in common with their intellectual co-religionists in southern Europe or in Britain. His aim was therefore to extirpate or banish them, and fill the country with English and Scottish Protestants. He had no similar design against British Eoman Catholics, who, though few in number, were represented by some of the most distinguished families. Cromwell evidently thought Irish Catholics out of the pale of civilisation, and desired their banishment more from prejudice against their nation than against their faith, which, though he greatly disliked, he well knew was the religion of some of the best educated of his fellow English- men. William III. took more enlarged, tolerant views, owing to his greater knowledge of European poHtics, with which he, like all experienced statesmen, knew Britain must be involved either directly P 2 212 BEITISH POWER AND THOUGHT or indirectly. He knew that Protestantism was supreme in some parts of Europe, and was subject in others, and his earnest wish was to promote its free toleration abroad by the extension of that prin- ciple throughout Britain and Ireland. Though sur- rounded and perhaps annoyed by intolerant, bigoted, or short-sighted advisers, lay and clerical, in England, urging him to gratify some of his Christian subjects at the expense of others, William steadily rejected their suggestions as to his general policy. His wide knowledge about the state of the Christian world then existing around him was, fortunately for man- kind, in his case united to a calm, enlightened mind and an almost imperturbable temper. He was eminently fitted to rule a variety of religions, to preserve the peaceful votaries of each from the persecution of fellow-Christians, and to have the real, yet somewhat perilous glory of seeing the intolerant of all parties oppose him, owing, in great measure, to his firmness in preventing them from persecuting each other. British literature about this time began to represent public feeling more than before, and this representation, when once begun, has increased more and more to the present day, when newspapers, the great daily and weekly BRITISH POWER AND THOUGHT 213 informants of all classes, seem extending to a vast degree their influence, knowledge, and varied information. Yet this literary influence was rather slow and gradual in its remarkable course. Among the English writers who about the time of Charles II. dealt most freely with the political and religious thoughts of Englishmen, Dryden was rather con- spicuous. This able, vigorous, sarcastic poet amusingly sketches in a singularly clever poem the chief Christian divisions in Britain, whose political state was then mainly influenced by the religious views of the kings and statesmen who alternately ruled it. Dryden diverted his readers, and perhaps himself also, by comparing the various Christian denominations in Britain to different animals, taking care to be specially favourable to Eoman Catholicism, the religion of the reigning King, James II., and suspected to have been that of Charles II., though that worldly, joyous prince rarely mentioned serious subjects. Dryden, an eminently good-natured, social, pleasure-loving man, probably never wished to inspire religious bitterness, yet had neither the conscientious- ness nor perhaps the judgment to much consider the practical effect of his writings. He describes all Protestant faiths as either odious or ridiculous, and 214 BRITISH POWER AND THOUGHT Eoman Catholicism as alone virtuous and calum- niated, but does not mention non-Christians. Many years after Dryden, Sir Walter Scott, in describing British religious contests, views the opposing sects in a very different spirit from that of the sarcastic Dryden. While the latter ridicules them as bears, panthers, wolves, monkeys, etc., tormenting the pure white Eoman Catholic deer, alike under the protection of the royal lion James II., Scott fairly describes the persecuted and persecuting among all. His emi- nently just mind cannot avoid recognising the best qualities of mankind among contending sects. He illustrates this valuable historic truth with a power and a candour which have really made him one of the most morally beneficial of British writers. At Dryden' s time, and both before and after it, the religious quarrels throughout Britain and Ireland were peculiarly vehement, unreasoning, and widely spread. Roman Catholicism, which had so indiscriminately condemned every Protestant opponent, was finally defeated politically, and its chief Protestant foes, the Prelatists and the Puritans, established themselves in England and Scotland. During some time these religious divisions, when no longer opposing or dread- ing Catholicism, reproached and even persecuted BRITISH POWER AND THOUGHT 215 each other, and very gradually settled down in comparative concord at the end of William III.'s reign. Ireland was so differently situated from Britain that the same results could not be expected by those acquainted with its history. Eeligious interests in that island altogether superseded political ideas. The divided British colonists, either English-descended Prelatists or Scottish-descended Puritans, though at times jealous of each other, were usually allied through alike dreading the numerical strength of their Eoman Catholic fellow-countrymen. After the stormy reign of William III. and the comparatively quiet one, at least in the three kingdoms, of his successor. Queen Anne, the two Jacobite revolts arose successively in Scotland in behalf of the son and grandson of the deposed James II., and against George I. and George II., who with their successors were alike bound by their Coronation oath to profess and maintain Protestantism, now the faith of the British majority. These revolts of 1715 and 1745 were nominally political, but religious interests, ideas, and motives largely inspired them. All Eoman Catholics were, as in duty bound, in favour of restoring the deposed Stuart family, whose ardent devotion to their faith 216 BRITISH POWER AND THOUGHT had chiefly caused their dethronement by the British Protestant majority allied with the Irish Protestant minority. The final defeat of the ' rebels ' or the Eoyalists, as the Jacobites were severally called by opponents and by partisans, was accompanied by a rigorous, unnecessary severity on the part of the victors. Yet there is sufficient cause to apprehend that the defeated party would have been equally if not more cruel had they triumphed. The orders given to the officers of the existing Government and to those of the Jacobites about the treatment of opponents showed a strong, and from a Christian standpoint a disgraceful, resemblance. Each party seemed to dread showing clemency to the other. The contest was really between honourable, high- minded men about the alleged and denied rights of a banished royal family, some among them believing the Stuarts were rightly deposed, others that they were not. It was a clear matter of political or legal opinion among civilised fellow-Christians and fellow- countrymen, and though war was of course inevit- able between them, yet the spirit of their common Christianity, known more or less to all of them, should have had more influence than history has to record. There could hardly occur a civil war among BEITISH POWER AND THOUGHT 217 Christians waged by fellow-countrymen which so imperatively claimed to be carried on according to Christian duty, involving mercy to the conquered by moderation in victory. Christianity had been established among both parties and their ancestry for centuries. Its doctrines were thoroughly known to the chief leaders on both sides. Throughout the Christian world at this period, Britain was perhaps the most civilised country. None of its contending princes, the old and the young Pretender, or the two reigning Georges, could be charged with crimes invol- ving their adherents in a common criminality. It was equally justifiable, therefore, that British subjects of different religious or political views should take opposite sides in such a contest. The established kings of Britain, or Electors of Hanover, as the Jacobites called them, were neither popular nor unpopular, while the two Pretenders were unknown in England, though the younger Prince Charles Edward had made himself very popular in parts of Scotland. But none of these contending princes had either personally attached friends or injured foes in England. The whole civil war was maintained, for the sake of preserving different ideas on religion and on politics, by Christian men alike desiring the 218 BRITISH POWER AND THOUGHT prosperity of Britain among other nations. Yet the mutual hatred of both parties, resulting in deliberate executions and confiscations of property, almost equalled that of the former factions of York and Lancaster centuries before. In that interval of recorded time, Christianity in the same or in differing forms had been the sole religion throughout Britain and Ireland. Its moral teaching and its Founder's words were the constant subjects of weekly repetition, and often of daily study. In every way its practical principles enjoined believers to treat those in their power with humanity, and show the example of clemency. Unfortunately the desire of both parties was to treat each other in the same severe way. Mercy to the vanquished was really thought dan- gerous to the safety of those extending it, and this apprehension, perhaps only too well founded, dis- tinguished both parties. There has been no war in British history, to a thoughtful mind, so morally grievous or disappointing in the conduct of both parties as the Jacobite revolts of 1715 and 1745. It is evident to impartial readers that in these Jacobite wars there was little difference between the contending parties in their treatment of opponents. The adherents of George I. and George II. and the BRITISH POWER AND THOUGHT 219 followers of the Pretenders were with only too much reason afraid of sparing or showing any indulgence to one another. There was much more resemblance between them practically than either would perhaps have owned. Civilised Christian fellow-countrymen of the eighteenth century, in fact, knew that their lives and property were not safe in the power of political opponents. Neither party in Britain during the reign of James II., nor in the Jacobite revolts, in behalf of his son, to restore the dynasty, had any right to complain of each other's cruelty, owing to the common severity of their political creed expressed in the legal sentence of death to all rebels. Apparently, while a more humane or peaceful British posterity pitied the victims of both parties, believing them alike cruelly treated, the sufferers themselves and their opponents thought rather differently. The former evidently wished that they had the luck to inflict what they suffered on their conquerors, and it was the reasonable fear of their doing so that forbade compassion in the hearts of those believing their lives endangered if their prisoners were not destroyed. It was fortunate for the British nation, and for the friendly feelings so steadily uniting England and Scotland, that Sir Walter 220 BRITISH POWER AKD THOUGHT Scott wrote a little more than half a century after the last Jacobite revolt. He perceived that the remnants and descendants of the Jacobites, who were mostly Scottish, still felt grieved and exasperated at the severe treatment of their ancestry. He perceived also, with the reasoning sagacity of his wise and just mind, that the ruling party, comprising the majority of Englishmen and many Scotsmen, instead of being ashamed of the cruelties inflicted by their partisans, thought them excusable owing to their reasonable fear of similar cruelty contemplated by the defeated faction. Scott, illustrating history through the medium of fiction, makes the brave yet fierce Jacobite Mac-Ivor ^ exclaim to the judge when sentenced to execution, ' You have caused honourable and loyal blood to be poured forth like water. Spare not mine. Were that of all my ancestors in my veins, I would have perill'd it in this quarrel.' His devoted adherent Evan, rejecting the judge's offer of mercy to himself, chooses to die with his chief. The humane judge, obliged to enforce the severe laws against treason, of which enactments all British parties virtually approved when they had the power to inflict them, then pronounces the last sentence. ' Waverley. BRITISH POWER AND THOUGHT 221 Yet had positions been reversed it is evident that Fergus Mac-Ivor would have eagerly poured forth ' rebel and disloyal ' blood, and that though his faith- ful follower Evan is so interesting in adversity he would have been an unscrupulous instrument of his chief's relentless will. In fact the tyrannical reign of James II. would have been practically restored under that of his son James III. had the Jacobites succeeded. When Scott wrote, however, all danger of Jacobite revolts had vanished ; yet some descendants of the victims in the civil war remained no longer rebellious but despondent, and with a deep sense of family injury. Scott decided, as if inspired, what course to take in his historical novels, those valuable works which his political opponent, Macaulay, has pronounced to be scarcely less valuable than real histories. In Scott's three novels, ' Waverley,' ' Eob Eoy,' and ' Eedgauntlet,' where the Jacobites are introduced or mentioned, he makes them interesting, noble, and cruelly treated, yet by no means preferable to their opponents. He usually represents the latter as much more sensible and self-controlled in peace, and more reliable than the fiery yet generous men whom he selects, partly from real history and partly from fancy, to represent the Jacobite party. 222 BRITISH POWER AND THOUGHT ' Let US hope,' he writes impressively towards the end of ' Waverley,' ' that we shall never see the scenes nor hold the sentiments that were general in Britain sixty years since.' It was about the time of Scott's novels that the wars of Napoleon, involving the chief European countries in desperate contest, enlisted all British subjects in act or in feeling against that general. The descendants of Jacobites and of their opponents alike acknowledged George the Third in the general European alliance against the French, who with their wonderful leader seemed at one time to defy almost the whole civilised world. The fall of Napoleon left all British parties in comparative agreement, alike rejoicing at the defeat of their common foe, while ever since that time Britain has certainly taken the lead in the politics of both Europe and Asia. BEITISH POWER AND THOUGHT 223 CHAPTEE XVIII Scott and Dickens compared in some of ttieir sketches of char- acter — Their different views in describing London — Scott's impartiality in religious views and in sketches of historical characters — Decline of party spirit in Britain, and its continu- ance in Ireland— The rising of 1798 — The French Eepublic and the Irish revolutionists. In his love of romance and great power of making it attractive, Scott presents a decided contrast to the celebrated Spanish writer Cervantes, whose wonderful book ' Don Quixote ' he often mentions with evident liking. It was the object of Cervantes to ridicule the love of chivalry once so prevalent in Spain, and to thus make his fellow-countrymen more practical and less fanciful than in previous history. ' Cervantes,' writes Charles Dickens, in his preface to ' Oliver Twist,' ' laughed Spain's chivalry away by showing Spain its impossible and wild absurdity. It was my attempt in my humble and far distant sphere to dim the false glitter surrounding something which really did exist by showing it in its unattractive 224 BRITISH POWEE AND THOUGHT and repulsive truth.' He thus introduces his own interesting, exciting story, in which the proverb that no one can touch pitch without being defiled is rather contradicted. The most villainous, odious, and depraved people are fairly shown without the least disguise, yet their characters and lives are made in every sense thoroughly repulsive instead of alluring. The youth of England, London especially, could hardly read a book more able ' to hold the mirror up to nature, to shew virtue her own feature, and the very age and body of the time his form and pres- sure.' Dickens, in fact, describes thieves and ruffians as they really are, verified in their accuracy by the author's well-known intimacy and conferences with the London police, a class above all others able to expose or reveal the secret acts, habits, and practices of the most desperate characters. While naming several British authors as describing thieves and robbers, Dickens in this remarkable preface strangely omits Sir Walter Scott. Yet except Dickens himself, no British novelist has described English and Scottish thieves and villains with more thorough exactness, though the people Scott describes usually belong to a former period, while those described by Dickens are nearly all those of or about his own time. Scott, in BRITISH POWER AND THOUGHT 225 the ' Heart of Midlothian,' ' Nigel,' and ' The Pirate,' describes the ' robbers of reality ' as naturally as Dickens did. Though no author loved looking on the romantic side of things more than Scott, yet his admirable good sense and sound morality always restrain him from indulging this inclination at the expense of truth. In ' The Pirate,' for instance, while representing Cleveland interesting and generous, he surrounds him with odious ruffians during his lawless career, except one or two faithful followers who have redeeming quahties. In the end Scott, instead of making the pirate chief die like a hero defending his ship, prudently contrives his capture, and finally makes him enter the British navy and there die honourably in his country's service. Perhaps no true British novelists were as popular or as generally admired in their different ways and different times as Sir Walter Scott and Charles Dickens. The real good they did through the medium of literature may sometimes be overlooked by super- ficial people who may read their works for mere amusement. But their true and permanent value has been acknowledged, bymany British statesmen and by the British pubUc generally, as among the most remarkable practical aids ever rendered to a civilised q 226 BRITISH POWER AND THOUGHT land by the influence of literature alone. Scott's celebrated novels ' Ivanhoe ' and ' The Talisman ' alike show the romance writer, and, to a great extent, the antiquary united in their author. "While, however, they dwell purposely on the attractive side of their periods, Scott well knew there was no danger of the evils of that strange time returning to Britain. He describes the crusades in the ' Talisman,' certainly in the most attractive manner, considering the expense, loss, misery, neglect of home interests, and real injustice involved by those extraordinary enterprises. In ' Ivanhoe,' when introducing Eobin Hood and his outlaws, the tournaments, the disturbed state of England, and Prince John's plots against his absent brother, Scott dwells chiefly on the alluring side. Despite the disorder of that troubled period, he emi- nently succeeded in making it singularly attractive to a remote and, comparatively speaking, enlightened posterity. From a historical point of view, the trial of the Jewess Eebecca for witchcraft is one of the most striking incidents of the book. The prejudices against her religion, and still more against the mysterious crime of witchcraft, recall a peculiar yet prevalent state of mind among earnest Christians now hardly comprehensible, but of which the sad fate of Miriam, BRITISH POWER AND THOUGHT 227 alluded to in the novel, and the historic tragedy of Joan of Arc, are terrible proofs. These prejudices existed not only among ignorant people in retired districts, but animated influential persons in large cities. Scott and Dickens, when mentioning London, do so in a very different style and from very diiferent points of view. The former generally introduces the Eoyal family in his London allusions. In ' Kenilworth ' we find Queen Elizabeth, in ' Nigel ' her immediate suc- cessor James I., in ' Peveril of the Peak ' his grandson Charles II., and in the ' Heart of Midlothian ' Queen Caroline. All these sovereigns would likely be well satisfied with Scott's descriptions. While mingling them with characters of his own invention he is evidently favourable to them, even to Elizabeth, whose hapless cousin and rival, Mary of Scotland, he in- troduces in ' The Abbot,' written just before ' Kenil- worth.' These rival queens, though described by the same hand, would probably be equally gratified by Scott's account of them. The same may be said of most historical statesmen or men of genius mentioned throughout the Waverley novels. They seem alike described in favouring rather than in a depreciating style. This view of them, so remarkable on the part of a writer in the nineteenth century, arose partly, 4 2 228 BRITISH POWER AND THOUGHT perhaps, from Scott's intense interest for the past in British history. In this respect he greatly differs from Macaulay, whose literary tendency is to laud the ancient Greeks and Eomans, and to rather censure, if not disparage, the British of ' the olden time,' and yet to criticise with interest and pleasure dis- tinguished personages of comparatively modern times, foreigners as well as English or Scottish. Scott, ap- parently liking London and thoroughly appreciating its grandeur, historic interest, and vast importance usually associates it with its rulers or distinguished men. Dickens does nothing of the kind in his London sketches. His peculiar interest in London lies chiefly in or about his own times, among people of no public importance whatever, and who are nearly always his own creations. A slight exception occurs in ' Barnaby Eudge,' where he introduces Lord George Gordon, who was really a man of little historic importance, and takes only a secondary part in the novel. The London of Dickens is the combined result of his personal observation and experience, materially aided by infor- mation given him by the police, with whom he had interesting interviews. Neither London's politics nor its religious history interested Dickens, apparently, in the least. His complete freedom from the slightest BEITISH PCWEE AND THOUGHT 229 religious if not political bias is one of his special characteristics. But Scott's most popular or most useful works are those describing religious and political contests in Britain, and these are subjects which Dickens avoids. Among them ' Old Mortality ' and ' The Abbot,' describing the Scottish civil and religious wars with surprising impartiality, evidently did good practical service in aiding to reconcile as well as enlighten the descendants of former foes in his own country. Ireland, unfortunately, has produced no imitator or rival of Sir Walter Scott to do her a similar service to that which he rendered to Scotland. The wars and revolts in that island have been eloquently described by poets and pohticians from opposite points of view ; but historical novelists have rather avoided the subject, or failed comparatively in its treatment. The civil wars of James II. and "William III. and the rebelUon of 1798, more recalled or talked about in Ireland to this day than the more recent battle of Waterloo is in Britain, were never fairly described in fiction like the Scottish wars and revolutions. These different Scottish and Irish contests with England were at different periods, yet some were rather near each other. In the two rather romantic revolts in Scotland of 1715 and 1745 Ireland took no 230 BRITISH POWEB AND THOUGHT part whatever. The battle of the Boyne and siege of Limerick, at which the Irish Catholic majority and the Irish Protestant minority alike proved that they pre- ferred religious to secular interests, had left Ireland completely under the dominion of whatever sovereign ruled Britain. During the Jacobite wars, therefore, the Irish Catholics remained passive, while the Irish Protestants, though opposed to the Jacobite cause, made little, if any, demonstration of their feelings. Neither of these Scottish revolts appealed in any way to Ireland, and their termination apparently produced no political effect upon its divided population. The American revolt against Britain, soon followed by the French republican revolution of the eighteenth century, in which the royal family were deposed and all religion publicly denied, produced a strange effect on the Irish, but little, if any, upon the Scottish people. The inter- course of the Irish Catholic clergy with France and Italy had taught them that, however oppressive British Protestant rule could be, it was less dangerous to their faith than the infidel principles which, for a time supreme in France, alarmed most sincere Christians throughout Europe. Protestant rule, more- over, had hitherto failed altogether to convert Irish Catholics. On the contrary, Irish priests visiting BRITISH POWER AND THOUGHT 231 France easily perceived that an unpopular Protestant government had rendered the Irish Catholics compara- tive examples of obedience to clerical influence. In fact, British rule, certainly without intention, had rendered the subjected Catholic faith more popular among the Irish majority than the French monarchi- cal government had been able to do before it was overthrown by political revolutioii. In no European country were the Catholic clergy so much respected or obeyed by their people as in Ireland. This fact in- duced some of the priesthood to become more cautious than before in dealing with Irish enmity to the Protestant British monarchy. This enlightenment, however, founded on the change in European, and chiefly in French politics, hardly existed among Irish priests who had never left Ireland. Accustomed as they usually were to utter and to hear the most hostile language among the divided Irish, they could hardly avoid sharing their own people's prejudices to their fullest extent, and were therefore astonished to learn, from priests equally zealous for the Catholic faith, that it had now worse enemies among the French at this time than either the British Government or the Irish Protestants. While the new infidel doctrines were influential in France, the feelings of the best 232 BRITISH POWER AND THOUGHT informed among the Irish Catholic clergy and of the Irish Protestants were, in many cases, greatly affected by the success of the two republican revolutions in America and in France. Both at first seemed to promise well for European civilisation ; but while the American revolution was a success in this respect, the French republic was a disgraceful failure. These two political changes in America and in France produced more effect upon the Irish than upon the English or the Scots, to all appearance. In each case the Irish were specially interested. The triumphant republicans in both countries seemed to many young Irishmen, Catholic and Protestant, as noble, patriotic men, whose new system of rule might lead to thorough civil and religious liberty. Travelling abroad was then becoming more easy and frequent, though its immense increase afterwards was of course never anticipated. Irishmen of whatever creed, when out of Ireland, mingled together in a far more friendly way than local prejudices permitted or sanctioned at home. These men, by their cordial admiration of the new republics in America and in France, soon formed themselves into a society called United Irishmen, who, expecting French aid and American sympathy, raised the singular rebellion of 1798 against Britain, hoping BRITISH POWEE AND THOUGHT 2a3 to make Ireland a republic rather after the French model. Such was the design of its chief promoters. Yet, while the leaders of this remarkable movement were mostly Protestants of republican views, the Irish Catholic majority, on whom they mainly relied for support, knew or cared little about political govern- ment. They had always regarded British rule as the symbol of conquest and, more recently, of Protestant injustice ; most of them thought that its overthrow must improve their condition, and consequently joined the revolution in many thousands. Of all rebellions ever known, there has, perhaps, been none in which leaders and followers were so different in feeling, sympathy, or desire. The former were enthusiastic republicans, mostly Protestant ; the followers were mostly zealous CathoHcs, caring little about forms of government, but longing to restore their faith in political power. Among them France had always been viewed as historically a friend, both in religion and politics. In the last Irish civil war against Britain, it was France that aided, by money and sympathy more than by troops, the cause of James II., and had afforded the banished Catholic sovereign a luxurious refuge. He was banished, so 234 BEITISH POWER AKD THOUGHT British and Irish Catholics thought, chiefly because of his devotion to their faith. But the France of 1798 had become a changed country — at least as far as Parisian government extended. Neither monarchy nor Eoman Catholicism had anything to hope from the French Eepublic, the avowed and, for a brief time, the successful foe to both. This amazing change in French thought and principles was well known by the ' United Irish ' leaders, but hardly known, perhaps little understood, by the Irish majority. When a small French force denouncing the Papacy landed in Ireland as allies of the revolu- tionists, the southern Irish believed that they came as the rescuing champions of oppressed Eoman Catholicism. This strange insurrection, therefore, chiefly headed by eloquent enthusiasts with little military talent, was soon suppressed by the British forces, and never really represented the desires or motives of Ireland's majority. BEITISH POWEK AND THOUaHT 235 CHAPTEE XIX Contrast between Scott's influence over the Scottish and Moore's influence over the Irish public mind— The unchanged influence of the Catholic clergy in Ireland proved by the civil wars and revolts in that country, and by the fall of Mr. Parnell — Hostility of the Catholic clergy to Napoleon. The rebellion of 1798, though not distinguished by remarkable battles or by heroes on either side, has been extolled in eloquent speeches, and also in the pleasing verses of the Irish poet Moore. His most popular verses are the Irish melodies in which he sets his own words to the ancient music of Ireland. His beautiful lines on music may be compared to Milton's in the ' Allegro ' on the same subject : Friendship's balmy words may feign, Love's are ev'n more false than they, O 'tis only music's strain Can sweetly soothe and not betray. Moore was a contemporary of Sir Walter Scott, but he adopted, unfortunately for Ireland, a very different course in poetical allusions to Irish history or politics 236 BRITISH POWER AND THOUGHT from Scott's example when dealing with Scottish history in his instructive novels. Though Moore lived much in England, and had, personally, very friendly feelings towards the English, yet in his poetry, and in some biographies, he apparently considers them, with their Scottish allies, as still Ireland's foes, while praising the rebel leaders of the 1798 movement, as if they resembled the traditionary heroes of Ireland bravely expelling its Danish invaders. Moore, from his liking for England, probably never meant by his exciting lines on Saxon oppression, the glory of slaying tyrants, and on Irish wrongs, to encourage or pre- serve Irish hatred to Britain, which has always existed, but in which Moore himself, at least in his later days, certainly never shared. His beautiful verses, expressed in refined English, yet show great indifference about their likely effect on many Irishmen. In reality, Moore's verses, while admired for their beauty alone by British readers, often give expression to Irish political discontent at the present time. They comprise a singular mixture of poetical fancy with vague traditions of Ireland's history. No more to chiefs and ladies bright The harp of Tara swells ; The chord alone that breaks at night Its tale of ruin tells. BRITISH POWER AND THOUGHT 237 Thus Freedom now so seldom wakes, The only throb she gives Is when some heart indignant breaks, To show that still she lives. As for the ever-popular lines on the Irish minstrel boy dying for the cause of liberty, if Irish history is fairly examined, such a youth could scarcely have existed. There were certainly young minstrels generally attending the principal chiefs, singing their praises — probably not often from disinterested motives, considering their dependent position under those war- like and, unless history belies them, rather irritable personages. It is likely enough that some young musical enthusiasts may have carried their harps to a battlefield and sung to their music in behalf of their chiefs, against some rival, or perhaps against Danish invaders. But their cause had probably little to do with the principle of liberty. To see their particular chief triumph over his foes and become almost absolute over his retainers, like Mac-Ivor in ' Waver ley,' was likely the true heart's desire of most, if not all, Irish minstrel boys. But liberty in its modern sense would have soon reduced native chiefs and their favourites to a far less proud position than they enjoyed in the wild days of their traditional 238 BRITISH POWER AND THOUGHT prosperity. When dying and destroying his harp, the young minstrel of Moore exclaims, in words worthy of William Tell or of Washington : .... No chains shall sully thee, Thou soul of love and bravery ; Thy songs were made for the pure and free — They shall never sound in slavery. * These sentiments are those of a noble youth of comparatively modern times, but at the period of their supposed utterance express ideas that were apparently unknown. The independent power of their chieftains was likely enough precious to young Irish minstrels who, like Galium Beg, the Highland youth in ' Waverley,' were probably favourites of their chiefs, yet often in a state of indulged slavery to their orders or caprices. Moore's Irish melodies were really almost as much admired in England as in Ireland, partly owing to the general ignorance among Englishmen of the peculiar and lasting force of Irish enmity. This feeling among the Irish Catholic masses had little changed since the civil war between James II. and William III., ending in the battle of the Boyne and siege of Limerick, the last stronghold of the deposed king's . Irish army. It may be said that, to this day, ideas derived from BRITISH POWER AND THOUGHT 239 one-sided historical versions of that memorable contest maintain their hold on the Irish people, both Protestant and Catholic, in a way which no subsequent revolt has done. The 1798 and 1848 movements were alike chiefly organised by men who, except in dislike to British rule, had little in common with their followers. Neither Lord Edward Fitzgerald, nor "Wolfe Tone, the chief promoters of the former, nor Smith O'Brien and John Mitchel, the chief promoters of the latter, had they succeeded, would have endured or granted the chief desire of a large majority of their nominal adherents. This desire would certainly have been the re-establishment of Roman Catholicism in Ireland, restored by James II. for a brief period since its political deposition by Queen Elizabeth. Whether, in the strange event of a faith restored by rebel leaders who did not believe it, a Catholic king or a Catholic republic would have resulted, can never be known ; yet certainly neither alternative would have gratified the leaders of 1798. During the middle and end of the last century Ireland experienced many legal changes, great popular discontent, and serious political strife, but no dangerous rebellion. Undeterred by the usual failure of Irish popular leaders, another chief. 240 BEITISII POWER AND THOUGHT for a short time perhaps more influential than his predecessors, Charles Stewart Parnell, ruled, or mainly influenced, a large majority of the Irish nation. But their sudden and violent change towards him, and his narrow escape from death or serious injury hy the violence of men who shortly before seemed devoted to him, are instructive examples of the uncertainty of Irish popular favour. The essential difference between Irish esteem and Irish popularity has, perhaps, hardly been enough considered or rightly understood. Men like the excellent Father Mathew, for instance, ' the apostle of temperance,' who for a short time was wonderfully successful in combating the odious vice which has always afflicted Ireland, lived and died, seldom loudly applauded, yet loved, respected, and, to a great extent, obeyed. His calm, quiet, beneficent career was a noble and instructive contrast to the noisy, extravagant, yet applauded folly and violence of many Irish political leaders. There was really as little in common between Parnell and the Irish Catholic majority, his main support, as between their ancestors and Wolfe Tone, or Smith O'Brien and Mitchel. In all these cases the motives or objects of the leaders were essentially political, those of their followers were essentially religious. BRITISH POWER Al^D THOUGHT 241 Mr. Parnell, believing himself well acquainted with the Irish character, apparently knew it better in America or on the Continent, perhaps also in Britain, than he did in its native, isolated home. He always made, or rather tried to make, the religious question in Ireland a secondary consideration to political change. Yet it is, and has always been, the first consideration, the ruling influence among the Irish majority, and of more consequence, as well as of more interest, than any political aspiration. In this respect Mr. Parnell mistook the Irish, much as Wolfe Tone did in 1798. In the latter's private diary, published after his death, and which he probably would never have wished published without some omissions, he avows intense enmity to the Papacy and to Eoman Catholicism generally, with an abusive scorn of which reasonable or tolerant Protestants would have been ashamed. Yet each of these able men was specially influential among the Irish Catholics, from whom they received sums of money for political purposes, and were for a time greatly trusted by them. The real feelings of both leaders were not those of their followers, but were, in many ways, intensely opposed to them. Tone doubtless knew many nominal Irish Catholics in France, and perhaps judged his fellow-countrymen s 242 BEITISH POWER AND THOUGHT at home by them, as his revealed sentiments, if pub- lished in his lifetime, would have been fatal to his ascendancy over Catholics in Ireland. Mr. Parnell, though a more practical and, to use a modern phrase, ' up-to-date ' man, was yet utterly confounded at what he called his desertion by former Catholic adherents following the advice of their clergy. Had he studied the revolts of 1798 and of 1848 with sufficient attention, their peculiar nature, as well as their failure, he might not have evinced that despair- ing astonishment which he could not conceal, and which apparently shortened his somewhat brilliant, yet finally most disappointed life. The same over- ruling power in Ireland that had commanded Irish Catholics to abandon ancient Celtic ideas of national freedom, and to die on behalf of a deposed English king because he was a devoted Boman Catholic, many years later forbade participation, while per- mitting sympathy, with the Irish rebels of 1798. In the succeeding century the same time-honoured clerical influence commanded the Irish majority to suddenly abandon a leader whom it had decidedly favoured before, owing to his conduct in a divorce case. In these instances a similar obedience was paid to the successive representations of the same BRITISH POAVEE AND THOU&HT 248 clerical authority. It is true that thousands of Irish Catholics, mostly headed by Protestants, even a few priests, joined the rebellion of 1798. But when condemned by the higher clergy of the Catholic Church, the movement, instead of being a religious one, became in fact a republican revolt, in which leaders and followers were secretly opposed to each other. These facts show the historic truth. The war between James II. and William III. remains in political effect and religious bias a permanent lesson in the Irish mind. All subsequent revolutions or attempts at revolt, however celebrated by eloquence, poetry, or enthusiasm, sink into comparative oblivion when recollections of that all-important contest are revived. It naturally produced the singular, and at first sight almost contradictory, results of confirm- ing the authority of a Protestant sovereign, while strengthening that of the Eoman Catholic clergy over the Irish majority. The Church among the latter has ever since been the ruling power over the hearts of the Irish. No amount of enthusiasm, eloquence, energy, or talent has ever yet rivalled it in mental influence or in political popularity. Soon after the rebellion of 1798, and the Parlia- mentary Union between Great Britain and Ireland, B 2 244 BEITISH POWER AND THOUGHT the affairs of the Continent diverted British and Irish attention from the state of their own countries to that of Europe generally. The French, under Napoleon — who, after replacing the Eepublic, turned their energies from domestic dissension to foreign wars — found in the British their most inveterate and finally most successful opponents. Napoleon's last defeat, surrender, and exile, chiefly accomplished through British power and determination, while re-^ storing peace to the Continent, greatly raised British influence throughout Europe. Napoleon's wars had the practical effect of reconciling all Scotsmen, even descendants of the Jacobites, to England's influence abroad. In Ireland Napoleon's quarrel with the Pope forbade his being thought a friendly champion, even by the enemies of Britain, which otherwise he probably would have been. The Irish priesthood, always the supreme directors of political senti- ment among the majority, in common with the Catholic clergy in every country, dreaded and disliked the power of Napoleon. Though he had certainly replaced the infidel Eepublic in France, and for- bade persecution of the clergy, yet the Papacy, which always acknowledged the rights of the French royal family, was never reconciled to Napoleon's BRITISH POWEE AND THOUGHT 245 authority. His fall, therefore, was regretted by the French alone — he was their national hero, but had united nearly all Europe against him. After the restoration of the French monarchy, the Continental powers and Britain were for some years friendly with each other ; their joint triumph over Napoleon, their common enemy, was naturally a bond of union or friendship among them for some years. Napoleon's campaigns beheld all parties in Britain and Ireland united against the French either in war or in senti- ment. The Irish Catholics, hitherto friendly to France in quarrels with Britain, were at this time restrained by the influence of their clergy from show- ing, if not from feeling, sympathy with Napoleon, and, though inclined to be friendly as ever with the French people generally, yet cordially desired the restoration of the French monarchy. The result of Napoleon's final defeat certainly inclined all parties in Britain, and to a great extent those in Ireland, to be loyal, at least for a time, to the British monarchy. 246 BEITISH POWEE AND THOUGHT CHAPTEE XX Attractive powers of Scott, Dickens, and Maoaulay — Continued literary as well as political supremacy in the capitals of western Europe — Increase of newspapers throughoat all civilised coun- tries — Affairs of foreign lands engross British attention more than ever before. When Sir Walter Scott's novels appeared, his impartial descriptions of Scottish civil wars and rebellions were peculiarly acceptable to differing religious or political divisions throughout Britain. His account of British princes and statesmen of opposing views in religion and politics were well suited to their descendants or representatives at a time when their differences, no longer causing warfare, were more likely to be recon- ciled by the general rejoicing among all classes in Britain at the fall of Napoleon. Soon after Scott's novels appeared, or during the publication of some of them, the home Government of Britain underwent important changes. The Eeform Bill, which an able historian says ' was mitigated in any dangerous ' Alison's History of Europe. BRITISH POWER AND THOUGHT 2i7 effects by the influence of Scott's historic writings, and Eoman Catholic emancipation alike showed that Britain, triumphant after the battle of Waterloo, and friendly with European Powers, was the more com- petent and disposed to attend more carefully, perhaps, than ever to the amelioration of her people at home. Shortly after Scott's novels were known, the works of Charles Dickens, dealing specially with the lower classes of London's population, invested them with a strange interest altogether new in British literary history. Though in a different way, Dickens shows himself as tolerant a writer as Scott in religious and political opinions, though he rarely mentions history, which was always Scott's strong point- for illustration and sound reasoning. Dickens chiefly deals with his own times or a few years before them, and his works aroused general interest throughout Britain and her colonies never surpassed even by those of Scott. Their influence, however, extended in a comparatively slight degree to Ireland, while their peculiarly civilis- ing effect among the lower classes in England can hardly be sufficiently estimated. Charles Lever's lively novels, mostly about Irish military life, excited also much interest at about the same time ; but they seldom allude to the religious, political, or historical 248 BEITISH POWEE AND THOUGHT state of Ireland. His works, as the French say of their great writer, Moliere, were nearly always ' pour rire ' — to divert and to enliven rather than to instruct — and their influence therefore was never suited or perhaps meant to be permanent. But Scott, Dickens, and to some extent Thomas Moore, had more in- fluence than they were probably aware of among many readers. In Scotland, the able yet kindly protests of Scott against religious and political in- tolerance produced in great measure the excellent effect he intended, in encouraging a sincere as well as a permanent peace among differing creeds and parties. In England, London perhaps especially, Dickens, expressing in a peculiarly attractive, sensa- tional style the most pathetic appeals in behalf of the poor, the ill-used, and the neglected of the popu- lation, aroused general attention, interest, and sym- pathy. In Ireland some of Moore's poetry apparently tended to confirm the hereditary dislike of the majority towards the Danes and the British, who in his verses appear alike as the foes of that country. His ideas in this respect were regarded as histori- cally true in Ireland, an impression which Moore, from his personal liking for England and the English, could hardly have meant to produce. BRITISH POAVER AND THOUGHT 249 Amid these attractive, brilliant writers, the most accomplished British historian of the nineteenth century, Lord Macaulay, appeared, and at first by his instructive essays, and lastly by his eloquent British history, attracted the earnest attention of educated Europeans. This eminent, accomplished) scholar delighted not only in classic literature, but in recall- ing the wisest men of most countries, ancient, medieval, and modern, investing many various subjects with an almost sensational interest hitherto usually confined to works of fiction or to poetry. He per- ceived and avoided the dry, uninteresting style of previous and contemporary historians, and accor- dingly in his essays and final history he rivals the charm of fiction by endowing with a similar attractive style subjects hitherto of little interest except to profound, learned scholars. Yet in his admirable literary criticisms he occasionally expresses opinions which seem scarcely fair or trustworthy. He declares, for instance, that in truthful delineation of character Miss Austen approaches nearest to Shakspere. It may surely be said that he apparently overlooks Thackeray in this statement. Dickens's works were thought by some too sensational or exaggerated, Scott, perhaps, too romantic or antiquarian for 250 BRITISH POWER AND THOUGHT comparison with the practical, homely sketches of Miss Austen, who certainly makes no failure, yet never rises nor tries to rise beyond minutely de- scribing with peculiar accuracy somewhat ordinary English characters of about her own times. But Thackeray really competes with Miss Austen on her own ground, and also goes far beyond her limits in literary description of English character. He has, in fact, achieved on a comparatively large scale what Miss Austen accomplished on a more limited one. Macaulay's great talent for making history interest- ing, a literary exploit in which he rivals the sensa- tional novelists of his day, is among his remarkable gifts. Men and events which most historians would have mentioned with dry, studious exactness, Macaulay invests with lively interest in a way peculiarly his own, and to which much of his popu- larity is likely due. A remarkable instance of his singular literary power occurs when describing the apparent terror of Lord Sunderland, a statesman who, according to Macaulay, was treacherous to both William III. and to James II., and who tried, like the bat in the fable, to keep friendly with both contending parties. 'Fear bowed down his whole soul, and was so written in his face that all who BRITISH POWER AND THOUGHT 251 saw him could read. It could hardly be doubted that if there were a revolution the evil counsellors who surrounded the throne would be called to a strict account, and among those counsellors he stood in the foremost rank. The loss of his places, his salaries, his pensions was the least he had to dread. His patrimonial mansion and woods at Althorp might be confiscated. He might lie many years in a prison. He might end his days in a foreign land, a pensioner on the bounty of France. Even this was not the worst. Visions of an innumerable crowd covering Tower Hill and shouting with savage joy at the sight of the apostate, of a scaffold hung with black, of Burnet reading the prayer for the departing, and of Ketch leaning on the axe with which Eussell and Monmouth had been mangled in so butcherly a fashion, began to haunt the unhappy statesman.' ^ This pictorial description of Sunderland's fears and perils, like a mental panorama, Macaulay seems to chiefly found on a short footnote, which ' says that Sunderland's terror was visible.' Yet Macaulay's eloquent descrip- tion may really represent no more than the historic truth. In a historical novel such a description would be indeed admired, but in a regular history ' History of England, cb. ix. 252 BBITISH POWER AND THOUGHT some practical readers might be disposed to distrust it or think it exaggerated. Yet such brilliant lan- guage, expressing so much imaginative power, greatly enhances the attraction of either a novel or a history. It may always remain a doubtful question or matter of differing opinion among Macaulay's readers how far his glowing fancy, always accompanied by vast historical knowledge, may or may not exceed the limits of historic truth in the task before him. His chief weakness or defect, in common with his great contemporary Thomas Carlyle, may perhaps be ' hero worship,' or inordinate, unreasoning admiration for certain eminent men. This feeling, often arousing delusive enthusiasm, Carlyle seems to admire in his great essay on the subject, and Macaulay evidently cannot resist it sometimes when describing historical characters. Carlyle warmly praises Mohammed, John Knox, and other eminent men with an enthusiasm seldom if ever shown before, save by Mohammedans or by ardent Puritans. This warm advocacy shows the spirit of the nineteenth century in England, which its foreign policy and domestic legislation have alike carried into practical effect. Subjected Moham- medans may praise their Prophet now as freely under Christian rule as under their own denomination. BRITISH POWER AND THOUGHT 253 The most sincere Puritans now find no cause for complaint or indignation against a Prelatist sovereign. The literary inclination of the nineteenth century, especially its latter half, at least in Britain, has been to recognise personal greatness or individual merit among all creeds and nations. Carlyle and Macaulay, in their essays and histories, have thus praised re- ligious or political celebrities, no longer fearing them, with a fairness unknown in former times, and from a calm English standpoint. Each of these distinguished writers has, in different ways, produced a great effect on the British literary mind during the middle and end of the nineteenth century. During its eventful period, British literature, ' one of the many glories of England,' as Macaulay says, has been distin- guished on almost every subject promoting the know- ledge or enlightenment of civilised men. Among its special excellences are new editions of most of the best works transmitted by classic and by mediaeval times, enriched with the additional knowledge and varied information of the present enterprising age. Though some persons may highly value the first or original editions of standard works, yet the highest literary value is surely attained when the wisdom of most ancient writers is united with the additional know- 254 BEITISH POWER AND THOUGHT ledge and increasing information of succeeding ages. Macaulay's admirable essays comprise nearly all these advantages. With the taste and information of the nineteenth century he brightens up dry or abstruse writers of other days, making their works, to many people for the first time, easy and interesting among readers to whom they had been like a sealed book, or in a foreign language till illuminated by Macaulay's brilliant explanation. He invests some classic as well as modern writers, British or foreign, with a new vivid interest with which even studious admirers had seldom been able to associate them. This peculiar power of lighting up the past either in words, poems, or essays, with the lively influence of existing times, has been rarely tried, and is therefore the more valuable in literary history. Except Shakspere, few British writers before the nineteenth century had suc- ceeded in this respect. Many writers, indeed, before and since his time, writing on historical subjects, have apparently never tried to render their works interest- ing. They evidently desire to give useful instruction to patient and laborious students, not to render real characters or historic facts in any way attractive to the public. Shakspere, Scott, and Macaulay in differ- ent ways have accomplished this literary exploit with BRITISH POWEE AND THOUGHT 255 a success whicli hitherto seems of permanent value as well as interest. Almost contemporary with the two last-named authors, at least in the same century, have appeared the astonishing revelations of ancient times, rewarding the great efforts of such explorers as Layard, Maspero, Petrie, and others. The dis- coveries made by these energetic men aid remarkably, though indirectly, the literary efforts of modern Europe, Britain especially, in recalling past ages more than ever before to the intelligent appreciation of the present time. In these studious researches, whether of historians, travellers, or antiquarians, human intelligence has shifted its ground from east to west during many past centuries, more especially in the eighteenth and nineteenth. The celebrated lands of former ages are now chiefly inhabited by an ignorant posterity, the achievements of whose remote ancestry are, and have been for many years, mainly elucidated and studied by inhabitants of countries formerly unknown to them. It is to British, Germans, French, and Italians that recent explorations in Egypt, Assyria, and Asia Minor are almost exclusively due. Modern Europe seems not only far superior to modern Asia and modern Africa in mental and bodily enter- prises, in its learning as well as in its conquests, but 256 BRITISH POWER AND THOUGHT hitherto vastly superior to the New World of America. This immense continent up to the present time has not shown much inclination or capacity for rivalling Europe in intellectual or martial enterprises. Its European-descended colonists, while speaking the lan- guage and professing the different forms of Christian- ity taught by their mother-countries, Britain, Spain, and Portugal, keep still apparently in the background. Not only does none of them evince much desire for conquest in any part of the world, but in the peaceful domains of art and literature they have hitherto shown less genius or intellectual power than might have been expected, considering the great nations from whom they are descended. The same may be said of modern Asia and Africa. They seem, even their native Chris- tian inhabitants — Armenians, Copts, &c. — to share very little in the increasing development of the European mind. Neither in the oldest nor in the newest countries of the world do there seem the same eager inclination and capacity for acquiring or utilising knowledge that so eminently distinguish western Europeans. The wisest or most learned men of ancient days, if restored to life, would find their immortal works and transmitted wisdom examined and appreciated BRITISH POWER AND THOUGHT 257 more in western Europe than in any other part of the world. In its countries, almost imknown to the wisest men of former ages, their transmitted thoughts and mental greatness are alone appreciated with the admiring interest of sympathetic minds. It is in the civilised capitals of western Europe where the best works of the greatest men of remote antiquity are now preserved and venerated with the esteem, care, and attention of "cultivated scholars. Thus the spread of general reading, and the vast increase of travelling, so remarkable during the nineteenth century, have to a great extent ascer- tained and elucidated the ancient histories, before only vaguely indicated, of the most distant nations. This triumph of practical inquiry has naturally brought the civilised and uncivilised worlds closer together than ever known before in their several histories. This great change in man's social life has brought an increased and increasing demand or need for newspapers, conveying all the news of the world, and translated into the various languages of the civilised, and even half-civilised, nations. The vast extension of Christian colonies, chiefly under Britishy Eussians, French, and Germans, has lately some- what tended to turn popular attention in England s 258 BRITISH POWER AND THOUaHT from domestic to foreign affairs, and to render home literature of rather less interest than the stirring excitement ' of wars or rumours of wars ' among distant countries, many of which now, through com- mercial interests, are directly or indirectly connected with British prosperity and influence. This influence, however, seems no longer much devoted to religious propagation. At present the British, French, and Eussians are steadily trying to attach non-Christian subjects to their political rule, and in this design they appear to succeed in a most remarkable degree. This tolerant policy is sometimes more perceptible in the distant dominions of these great Powers than in their own countries. In France and Russia, for instance, popular prejudices against the Jews form a curious contrast to the complete religious toleration accorded by the French and the Eussians to their Mohammedan subjects. Even in Britain eager disputes still arise between fellow-Christians about comparatively trifling differences in religious belief, while in the most remote British dominions in Asia and Africa complete freedom is legally extended to all religious denominations. BBITISH POWER AND THOUGHT 259 CHAPTEE XXI The recent free discussion on religious truth by members of different denominations at Chicago— Change in modem Christian opinion about Mohammedanism — The last war in eastern Africa between Christians allied with Mohammedans against other Mohammedans. Beitish literature, especially for the last twenty years, has rather yielded in attraction to foreign or colonial news, conveyed through newspapers, and this tendency seems still increasing in Britain. Countries formerly inaccessible are now so well known that, to some people in Britain, Asia and Africa are nearly as interesting as their own neigh- bourhood. British and foreign literature in recent years apparently anticipated this change. The recent discoveries in celebrated countries of the Old World, together with the vast exploration of lands formerly unknown, when described in graphic lan- guage by enthusiastic and accomplished travellers, produced the natural effect of iuducing fellow-country- men at home to either travel themselves or to study s 2 2S0 BRITISH POWER AND THOUGHT with increaBing interest the information furnished by others. This drawing together, as it were, of all nations with their differing religions into a communi- cative world of free thought will probably make religious discussion more improving and instructive than ever in our history. Yet hitherto this result has hardly been sufficiently attained. Notwithstand- ing the vast changes in men's knowledge, habits, and national influence, the subject of religious truth seems distant as ever from becoming one of agree- ment among the most educated men. No discovery, no elucidation, no genius has brought any real addi- tion to this most sublime subject of human thought and human wonder. The late remarkably interest- ing meeting of men representing various creeds at Chicago had apparently more a beneficent or kindly than educational result. It certainly, by free, peaceful religious discussion induced many people to return from it with more charitable, enlightened ideas. Instead of being entirely guided by sectarian or one- sided advocates of any particular faith, this varied assembly, many for the first time, made acquaintance with each other's belief and thoughts in tree, calm intercourse. This result must have been most useful to those fortunate enough to attend the meeting, and BRITISH POWER AND THOUGHT 261 perhaps to some whom they influenced at home ; yet no actual discovery, revelation, or even basis of agreement ensued. Since this important assembly, those returning from it to England may have been surprised to hear the angry conflicts in the midst of the most civilised countries between fellow- Protestants about religious ceremonies, or ritualistic practices, as they are often called. These matters of differing opinion arising among the most worthy, well-educated members of Christian divisions, while so many non-Christian faiths flourish around them, may surprise religious, enlightened men. Evidently religious belief is, of all subjects, the one least affected by modern changes or discussions. The vexed, and, strange to say, the irritating, question of religious doctrine, even when confined to details of church ceremonial, still arouses angry passions which, though now restrained by law, seem a reminiscence of former times. Like more important religious dissensions, these apparently trifling dif- ferences are not disputes between ignorance and knowledge, or between bigotry and toleration. Even in mere ceremonies connected with church service alone, religious men of opposite character are allied with and opposed to each other. This has always 262 BEITISH POWEK AND THOUGHT been the case in most important and in most trivial disputes relating to Divine worship. They are alike the differences of ■worthy, sincere men, who yet, unfortunately, are often unable or unwilling to do justice to each other. In a world of so much sin, violence, dishonesty, and cruelty, the quarrels, crimes, or errors of the well-meaning form the most perplexing of all the studies ia its strange history. Keligious disputes, even among Christians, as to how Divine worship should be celebrated in a manner most acceptable to the Creator and most beneficial to men, have sanctioned the most extraordinary yet legalised injustice among civilised people. The mystery surrounding the early history of most religions partly explains, though it cannot justify, such conduct in Christian history. Notwithstanding all antiquarian research, so wonderfully successful during the nineteenth century, and despite the vast increase of national intercourse throughout the world, religious truth or manifestation still remains the subject of comparatively ancient history. It remains, unmoved, untouched, unexplained by worldly triumphs, discoveries, inventions, glories, or disasters, while the religion of Mohammed, in many respects comprising the faith of the Old and the New BRITISH POWER AND THOUGHT 263 Testaments, is the last revelation of religious truth believed by some civilised men. This religion, how- ever, though it has lost much of its military power, remains the faith of more enlightened votaries than any of those who formerly acknowledged it. Though no longer making many converts, it yet resists decisively the religious influence of Christian rulers. It is evidently not a religion of mere ignorance or national isolation, as was once imagined by zealous Christians. Throughout civilised history this faith has been much calumniated or misrepresented, but is now beginning to vindicate itself, and is better understood by the Christian world. During many centuries it was thought right among Christians to usually mention Mohammed with an execration, and, during the Crusades, for Christians to slay Mohammedans was thought meritorious in itself.' A vast change has now come over Europe on the im- portant subject of religious estimation, a change of course the inevitable result of increased and increas- ing information. European opinions, especially among the British, now place Mohammedanism in a very different position from what it ever occupied before in religious history. ' See Sir Walter Scotl's allusion to these ideas in Ivanhoe. 264 BRITISH POWEE AND THOUGHT An able British writer' inclines to think that Mohammedanism is the form of Christianity best suited to the nations of the east, and the views of the Koran about Christianity certainly evince an admir- ing spirit very different from the distrust of many sceiDtics. Some people may think that belief in the favourite Mohammedan phrase, ' There is one God, and Mohammed is his prophet,' may be accepted by Christians without abandoning Christianity. It should be remembered that Mohammed appeared several centuries after the death of Jesus, and during that interval, as well as before it, Arabia had endured a debasing and cruel idolatry, which insisted on human sacrifices. From this dangerous superstition the personal valour as well as the zealous preaching of Mohammed delivered his fellow-countrymen, and he was there- fore a decided benefactor to his grateful nation. He took the Jewish Old Testament as the foundation of his faith, and acknowledged Jesus a true prophet sent by the Creator. He blamed the Jews for hastening the death of Jesus, but also blamed Christians for equalising Him with the Creator, of whom He was a manifestation without possessing a Divine nature. ' Mr. Bosworth Smith. BRITISH POWER AND THOUGHT 265 Mohammed also declared that, without claiming superiority to Jesus in personal nature, he yet brought the latest Divine revelation to man. In these doc- trines it can hardly be said that the chief Christian principles are really discredited. Many professing Christians do not hesitate to deny the worship of the Trinity, or equalising Jesus with the Creator who sent Him on His earthly mission, restricting that personal mission to the Jews, ' the lost sheep of Israel.' The faiths of the Buddha and of Zoroaster have also risen in Christian estimation, during the nineteenth century, to an extent unknown before it, though neither shows any knowledge of Judaism or of Christianity. The Jews at present occupy a rather contradic- tory position among different European nations. In Britain they were never so influential ; yet a strong pre- judice exists against them on parts of the Continent, which may be chiefly founded on ancestral enmity. This strange antipathy to helpless, obedient fellow- subjects seems confined to Eussia, parts of Germany, and parts of France. Britain has been for many years free from such bigotry, though it existed during the reigns of some early English sovereigns, especially in that of King John, when both Jews and 266 BRITISH POWER AND THOUGHT Mohammedans at home or abroad were hardly con- sidered as fellow-men by Christian rulers or warriors. A complete alteration in this respect has long en- lightened the British mind, though it was never so fully developed as during recent years. A remarkable change also in Mohammedan feeling was recently proved in the savage wars of the Mohammedan fanatic the Khalifa and his predecessor the Mahdi against their Egyptian fellow-Mohammedans, whose friendship or alliance with the British partly roused those bigoted chiefs and their Dervish followers against them. It seemed likely that but for British aid Egypt would have been conquered by these fanatics, when the death of the Mahdi, and the subsequent slaying of the Khalifa by the British in battle, freed Egypt, leaving its civilised ruler, the present Khedive, to peacefully cultivate friendly relations with the Chris- tian Powers. In these contests the Christian triumph was really rejoiced at by Egyptian and by Turkish Mohammedans, despite the desperate but vain efforts of Mahdi and Khalifa to make theirs a religious warfare, and to be considered champions of Moham- medanism against Christianity. Public interest in this singular contest was rather suddenly diminished BKITISH POWEE AND THOUGHT 267 by what has proved a far more important war with the Boers in South Africa, which began soon after the Khalifa was slain. Yet the previous contest be- tween Christians allied with Mohammedans against other Mohammedans was somewhat new in religious history. It is another proof of the more friendly feelings of civilised Mohammedans towards the Christians of the present day, and it may be hoped that it is a change well deserved by other Christian rulers as well as by the British. The votaries of non- Christian faiths are practically as free under British rule as they could be under that of their co-religionists. The works recently written about differing faiths and their founders by Christian authors are comparatively free from prejudices against them. Such freedom of thought on these subjects was seldom expressed in Christian literature before the nineteenth century. It may be owned by well-informed foreigners that in no comitry have so many non-Christians of various denominations lived so free from persecution as throughout the British Empire. British literary history, during the nineteenth century especially, has greatly aided or promoted this result. Whether in historic travels or in novels, the general tendency of literary men in Britain, recently, has been to raise 268 BRITISH POWEE AND THOUGHT non-Christian faiths rather than to lower them in Christian estimation, without, as a rule, depreciating the merit of Christianity. The result, if fairly examined, should gratify rather than depress the votaries of the latter. Its political supremacy was never so firm or extensive as it is at the present time, and yet it never had so many loyal non-Christians under its political authority. Though now so tolerant, if not indulgent, Christianity loses few votaries from its own ranks. The most earnest writers who plead not only for the toleration of non-Christians, but who see much to interest them in their various doctrineSj yet rarely desert Christianity for any of them. It does not appear, therefore, that the increasing tolerance of Christians in their treatment of non- Christians at all diminishes the number of the former, nor increases that of the latter. The religious world at present shows Christianity politically supreme, though in differing forms ; yet, doctrinally speaking, and in the number of its believers, it is only one religion amongst many. Some non-Christians are now equally civilised and well informed, but show little desire to convert or be converted. Many Jews and Mohammedans are far better educated than their ancestors could possibly have been. They mingle BRITISH POWER AND THOUGHT 269 freely with Christians, and some of these three denominations know each other's religions as well as they do their own, yet little sign of agreement appears between them. Toleration in legal act and principle is evidently increasing in every part of the world, but it seems to have more the result of preserving different faiths in legal security than of promoting any agreement about religious belief, or encouraging much discus- sion. While some zealous Christian missionaries may labour among more ignorant non-Christians with occasional success, the rich, influential Jews in England, and the Mohammedan rulers of Turkey, Persia, Morocco, and other countries, show no sign whatever of abandoning their faiths, though most, if not all of them, must be well acquainted with Christian history and doctrines. StUl none of these influential men shows any desire to interfere with the faith of others. The spirit of toleration so promoted by Christian writers, travellers, and statesmen seems practically paramount in most countries. It would be hard to over-rate the vast services that recent British literature has rendered to the cause of justice and of humanity throughout the world at large. Yet these improvements among civilised nations have not 270 BRITISH POWEE AND THOUGHT elevated mankind generally beyond a limited extent in a world of temptation, selfishness, and envy, as even the history of Christian nations has proved. Amid prevailing enlightened ideas, humane legisla- tion, and increasing knowledge about every subject in the power of human comprehension, startling signs of human ferocity and deceit appear in the very heart of civilised Christian lands. The last fifty years have witnessed in Christian cities, in the most civilised countries, plots, murders, and fraudulent conspiracies, as unscrupulous and cruel as ever were recorded in the history of mankind. The prevalence of Christianity in differing forms, and in supreme power, has failed to impress its first principles upon many who in education and position cannot be termed ignorant or regarded as mere savages. Eevolts and civil wars have likewise occurred during the latter half of the nineteenth century, as unmerciful and unscrupulous as ever, and these recent contests were mostly among Christians them- selves. The religious element, formerly so powerful in arousing the most peaceful nations to war, has been remarkably absent during late years from any scene of Christian warfare. Bacon's calm words, compara- BRITISH POWEE AND THOUGHT 271 tively disregarded at his stormy period by Protestant and Eoman Catholic fellow-Englishmen, now influence British rule at home and abroad. ' Men must beware that in the procuring of religious unity they do not dissolve and deface the laws of charity and of human society. There be two swords amongst Christians, the spiritual and the temporal, and both have their due office in the maintenance of religion ; but we must not take up the third sword to propagate religion by wars.' The zeal for making religious conversions, so remarkable and energetic during Christian and Mohammedan history, has wonderfully calmed down, if not diminished, among Christians and Moham- medans of the present time, though it offers more facilities for such undertakings than ever. In for- mer times, nations, even individuals, were frequently reconciled or alienated, owing solely to religious agreement or opposition. At present, nations or individuals do not often mention religion as a cause of friendship or of enmity, and seldom make it the avowed cause of warfare or interruption of friendly relations. The literary philosophy of the last cen- tury has tended in every way to prevent religious differences forming a barrier to social friendship ' Essay on Unity in Religion. 272 BRITISH POWER AND THOUGHT or political confidence. Since Mhoammedanism, no newer religious faith has been accepted by any nation ; it still remains the latest that is publicly avowed throughout the world. All fair-minded non- Christians must admit that Christianity politically rules directly or indirectly over nearly every nation of any consequence or political importance. It is the only faith, except Mohammedanism, which in a military sense can be termed influential, or likely to extend its limits yet further. The changes in British thought on this subject are very remarkable, and would seem greatly caused by the tone of British literature. The latter has, as might be expected, an im- mense effect on British legislation wherever its power extends, and this influence, in its turn, ^iSf discouraged religious bigotry even when its energy is exerted to promote Christianity. ' The quarrels and divisions about religion,' Bacon writes, ' were evils unknown ta the heathen. The reason was because the religion of the heathen consisted rather in rites and ceremonies than in any constant belief when the chief doctors and fathers of their church were the poets.' Bacon evidently means only the Pagans of Greece and Eome and perhaps of northern Europe. The non-Christian and heathen faiths of the present day could never be BEITISH POWER AND THOUGHT 273 described in this manner. Their present position in the religious and social world shows that they claim a consideration among Christian nations unknown at Bacon's period. Yet in a political sense the votaries of all non-Christian creeds have become more and more loyal to Christian authority in all matters except religion. In this one point political rule, influence, and temptation produce no permanent effect. Different creeds are now found to co-exist under the same government equally loyal to its poli- tical rule, yet quite independent of religious example and influence. These facts prove apparently the failure of all political governments when compared with that of Christians. The chief Mohammedan rulers are those of Turkey, Persia, and Morocco. The Ameers of Bokhara and of Afghanistan seem powerless for aggression, and are more or less influenced by the British or by the Eussians. No non-Christians in- Asia or in Africa are to be dreaded as invading conquerors. It is Europe itself which now, as it were, opposes its own advance, owing to the jealousies of its chief Powers. Political rivalry between British, Eussians, French, and Germans seems at present almost the sole obstacle to the complete triumph of European power over all non-Christian nations. X 274 BRITISH POWER AND THOUGHT CHAPTEE XXII Loss of political power and aggressive energy by non-Christian nations — Asia and Africa now almost in the power of Europeans, whose mutual jealousies alone retard their progress — The love of warfare now animates most Christian nations. The present state of the British and of the Eussian Empires, comprising an immense variety of races and religions, shows the political rule of Christianity with many non-Christian subjects loyal to it and flourishing under its sway. This co-existence of dif- fering religions under Christian political government, without any of them showing much tendency to convert or be converted, is new in religious history. It recalls in some degree the position of the Eoman Empire over its distant and varied subjects in pagan days. Yet such is the state of a great part of the religious world at the commencement of the twentieth century. Another change in recent history is the fact of Christian Powers at war with one BRITISH POWER AND THOUGHT 275 another, without any advantage being taken of their quarrels by non-Christians. Napoleon's wars proved this singular apathy on the part of the non-Christian world, though they were chiefly confined to Europe. His campaigns in Egypt and in Syria were perhaps too brief for Mohammedans to take advantage of them. But in later years the Crimean war, under- taken by French, British, and Italians to preserve Turkish rule from the attacks of Russian Christians and from the revolts of Greek Christian subjects, though successful, never strengthened any other Mohammedan Power. All the intrigues and enmity, so prevalent since, of the British and the Russians in Eastern Asia, have hitherto caused no Moham- medan revival in military strength, and have aroused no Mohammedan champion. All non-Christians, including Mohammedans, seem at the present time to have lost their former ambition or aggressive energy. In fact, European Christians apparently could now divide most, if not the whole of, Asia among them if they could only unite in sincere friendship for the cause of civilisation ; but this result, though no longer impossible, seems far off as ever. Even in the Boer war against the British in South Africa, a lamentable contest between T 2 276 BRITISH POWER AND THOUGHT European fello-w-Christians or their descendants in the midst of a savage country full of non-Christian natives, has hitherto produced no rising of the latter, who are all more or less controlled by each of the contending parties. This warfare, what- ever may be its justification, about which there is great difference of opinion among those who should be best informed, is certainly free from any religious object or motive whatever. This fact would be admitted by both parties alike. The war never had any religious design, and its results will likely make no change whatever in the religious state of the world. British history during the middle and end of the last century has not apparently called into existence any new sect, or aroused any new religious opinions. Scepticism in different degrees among professed Christians in Christian lands has lost much of its former bitterness, owing partly to the more patient and reasonable treatment it receives from religious men than formerly. It cannot always be termed, in its later forms, of an immoral or licen- tious character, which in former times usually dis- tinguished it. The many lives of the Christian Prophet lately written, or translated into English, by British and foreign writers show more the fair BKITISH POWER AND THOUGHT 277 inquiring spirit of truth-seeking scholars than of the sarcasm and sneering of previous writers on the subject. Eminent European scholars, among whom Max-Miiller was distinguished, have described the ancient and surviving religions of the Far East with a care, fairness, and learning scarcely devoted to the subject before. Their works, written in English or translated, have recently greatly attracted the reading public at home and abroad. Though they may not have caused conversions from Christianity, and are evidently not meant to do so, they have greatly increased European knowledge, and promoted, among the British especially, a complete tolerance of non- Christian faiths. The divided Christian Church in Britain and Ireland shows surprisingly little change in the numerical position of differing Protestants and Koman CathoHcs of late years. In Britain the former, in Ireland the latter, are in a decided majority, much as they have been for centuries. The practical result of the vast increase of inter- national intercourse and general knowledge which has marked the nineteenth century has signally refuted the ideas of religious enthusiasts in previous times. The cessation of religious persecution in Britain, and the legal justice shown to non-Christians 278 BRITISH POWER AND THOUGHT generally under British rule, have made all countries which obey it a secure residence for believers in every existing religious faith. This complete secur- ity, in its present extent, is almost new in Christian history, and may well be thought one of the chief glories of modern Britain. London at the present time affords the most complete safety to the votaries of all religions. This grand city has always repre- sented the intellect, the wealth, and the civilisation of England. It is in every sense its proper and suitable capital. No other British city or town has ever tried to rival its almost universal superiority. It unites in itself apparently medisBval and most recent times in the full development of English educational history. Unlike Paris, whose fierce demo- cracy has sometimes ruled and misrepresented a majority of the French nation, London is and always has been, the English capital in the truest sense. Poets and novelists as well as historians have alike described its practical and romantic interest. Shakspere in English historical plays — ' Henry VIII.' especially — often introduces London scenes and people in a manner which still resembles present times in some respects. Sir Walter Scott, in ' Nigel ' and 'Peveril of the Peak,' invests historic London BRITISH POWEE AND THOUGHT 279 Nvith many of the attractions of a former period. In recent years Charles Dickens often describes London with all the vivid interest and rare power of his remarkable genius. The London described by Dickens, without either the poetic charm of Shakspere or the romantic attraction of Scott, is its modern reality itself, yet made singularly interesting by the peculiar powers of the writer. London in a political sense, even since the time of Dickens, seems becoming more and more the capital, as it were, of Britain's most distant possessions. Its importance and its interest alike apparently increase during the pro- gress of time, while of all modern cities it seems to give the most material aid to the advance of general civilisation. The votaries of every religion may now worship freely in a Christian capital without fear or favour, and as a matter of civil right. They are even admitted into the British Parliament, and for the first time in history take part with Christian legislators in enacting laws for a Christian country. Yet these great changes in Christian ideas, and consequent legislation, have pro- duced hitherto no tendency to uniformity in religious belief. The oldest faiths recorded now flourish be- side the latest. A calm, if not passive, toleration 280 BRITISH POWER AND THOUGHT ■which would formerly have been considered a sinful and dangerous indifference ■ to religious truth, now influences alike the rulers and their subjects in questions of religious belief. The apprehensions and precautions so eagerly uttered and practised by religious zealots in former days are little heard of now in the British dominions. The fears which induced differing Christians to exclude each other from the same rights or privileges, lest conversion from truth should follow indulgence to error, are proved by recent history to be groundless. The British Empire in its religious position and policy proves clearly the errors committed in former times by its Christian divisions, even when animated by the highest motives. Political authority or power is shown to have no decisive effect in suppressing or encouraging religious opinion. It is a subject which, above all others, is by its nature independent of political or external influences. The history of the Jews from their national dispersion to this day, when they flourish rich and respected in many Christian cities, is a remarkable proof of this assertion. Yet this proof, though sufS- ciently decisive, was little noticed during Christian history, and for a long time failed to produce its BRITISH POWEE AND THOUGHT 281 proper effect upon Christian minds. It remained, however, as if to show and convince thoughtful men that it was useless as well as wrong to force or induce others, by persecution or by temptation, to change or pretend to change their opinion upon subjects beyond human comprehension. This warn- ing, emphasised by the Jewish example, was little heeded by Christian rulers in their legislation for many a century. It is now acknowledged, wherever British power or thought prevails, that in matters of religious belief no legal interference or even pre- ference, should be authorised. It cannot be denied that this new principle in Christian political govern- ment, which previously would have been opposed by many earnest and devout Christians, has pro- duced excellent results socially and politically, as proved by the present august position of British influence as well as power throughout the world. The contemporary historians. Gibbon, Hume, and Eobertson, have met with somewhat different treat- ment from their European posterity. Hume and Eobertson, in their English and Scottish histories, though still studied as able writers, have yielded greatly to Gibbon in permanent European estimation. While they wrote almost exclusively on British 282 BRITISH POWEE AND THOUGHT history in their chief works, Gibbon addressed all Europe as a most instructive teacher to most of its nations. His 'Decline and Fall of the Eoman Empire ' inclined, and still inclines, Christians, and latterly Mohammedans, to study the policy, exploits, and motives of their ancestry. From its broad- minded view of nations generally, his great work still retains interest, and affords information to modern minds. He seldom, if ever, mentions China or southern Africa, countries which now most attract British attention. It is those lands bordering the Mediterranean which he chiefly describes, but he also deals with parts of central Europe and of central Asia, and seems to anticipate the triumph of Eussia over Turkey, an event which the Christian Powers have, since his time, delayed, if not prevented, by engaging in the Crimean War. After Gibbon's time the eventful wars of Napoleon desolated most of the countries the historian describes as parts of the Eoman Empire. Their termination left little change in the political state of Europe. The Christian kingdoms and the one Mohammedan Government it contained remained not much altered till about the middle and end of the nineteenth century, which witnessed the establishment of Greece, and afterwards BBITISH POWEE AlfD THOUGHT 283 of Italy, as independent kingdoms ; while France, after the reigns of a few kings, and the Empke of the third Napoleon, is again under a Eepublic. But vast changes in popular feeling and national am- bition have occurred during the close of the last century, and which seem of increasing importance. Among them the trusted loyalty of Mohammedan subjects to Christian rulers, their numerical strength, firm adherence to their faith, and their political weakness are well worth attention. Mohammedanism, the most powerful religion known in the world since Christianity, maintains its hold over the con- victions of millions, while it has apparently almost ceased to desire political power or ascendancy. This altered position of the latest faith known to civilised men has been greatly caused by the commercial spirit which has lately influenced the policy of Christian nations, and from which Mohammedans derive real profit in friendly intercourse with Chris- tian rulers or neighbours. The Christian religion, represented chiefly by British, French, and Eussian political power, may now be said to mainly influence all Europe and the greater part of Asia and Africa. Yet the cause of religious conversion seems no longer a very important object among existing nations. In 284 BEITISH POWER AND THOUGHT a political sense the cause or interests of Atheism had never so great a chance of success as at present, yet it does not seem to extend to any great degree. No country, civilised or uncivilised, exists without professing some form of religious belief. The opinions of the French Communists actuate no existing Govern- ment. Even in France they only prevailed for a time in Paris and some other towns, and were never popular in the country districts. The French people and their present Government firmly profess Eoman Catholicism. The Greek Church in Eussia and in Greece, Protestantism in differing forms and Eoman Catholicism prevail in the chief civilised countries ; Mohammedanism in Turkey, Arabia, India, Tartary, and parts of central Asia, as well as in northern and eastern Africa, is certainly trusted by more civilised believers than ever before. In central and eastern Asia Buddhism and Brahminism prevail, but show little sign of either progress or of decliae. The Parsees, revived under British rule in western India, evidently rising in knowledge and intelligence, are de- voted to Christian authority. Atheism and scepticism in various forms continue to influence the thoughts of some learned and profound as well as ignorant and frivolous minds, but no government openly avows or BRITISH POWER AND THOUaHT 285 encourages anything of the kind. Whatever may be the secret opinions of sovereigns, statesmen, or re- publican presidents on the subject of religion, no open avowal of atheism is ever made by any of them. The profession at least of some religious belief seems inseparable from human government ever since the failure of the French atheist republic before the rise of Napoleon I. Among all nations Britain may now claim to rule the greatest variety of religious denominations. This grand position she has main- tained for many years, and it is a spectacle which would doubtless have deeply interested Gibbon had he been spared to witness it. But he left his great work on European history to be more and more appre- ciated by an enlightened posterity, who seem to agree with most of his opinions except those on religion. Upon this most sublime of all subjects human thoughts may be said, even in this civilised age, to remain comparatively unchanged. Upon this question the ancient, the mediaeval, and the modern worlds seem to unite their knowledge, while arriving at different conclusions and firmly maintaining them. The Jews and the Parsees still trust the Old Testament and the Zendavesta. The Brahmins and Buddhists remain little changed in their religions, as 286 BRITISH POWER AND THOUGHT far as they can be understood by Europeans. The differing forms of Christianity, now comparatively free from each other's persecution, seem to prove that mental enlightenment among their wisest representa- tives does not cause agreement, but rather confirms different views upon some points of the same religion. The immense increase of knowledge, international intercourse, and of travelling cannot fail to enhghten men about all connected with this world's history, position, and temporary interests. But respecting religious belief there appears to arise no enlighten- ment whatever, nor the least chance of any, as far as human experience and foresight can perceive. It is the one grand subject to which neither ancient learn- ing and wisdom nor modern discovery and education can add anything except in an altered construction of its principles in regulating human conduct. In this respect the British nation, it may be hoped, has achieved the highest practical success, when ruling with consistent justice millions of subjects professing nearly all the religions now known to exist in the world. Wise legislation, combining justice with mercy, in one race of men ruling millions of others, would seem, indeed, the most generally beneficial result of any religious belief. This result, it may be confidently BRITISH POWER AND THOUGHT 287 hoped, the British nation has in great measure ac- complished wherever its wide and increasing influence prevails ; yet from historical evidence it can hardly be expected, as eager philanthropists have hoped, that either religious or political freedom tends much, if at all, to diminish the love of warfare among civilised nations. Throughout modern Christian history, ambi- tion, national jealousy, and perhaps more latterly commercial rivalry, have caused more wars, especially between powerful nations, than either religious bigotry or contests for differing forms of political rule. These causes of warfare were eminently shown during Napoleon I.'s wars, as well as in most European contests since his time. In remote history of the most celebrated nations the love or admiration for warfare was general, and often surpassed every other thought or object of interest. The aids of poetry, painting, music, and eloquence in different nations, and in different ways, have often been devoted to its glorification. In the oldest Greek poem, the famous ' Iliad,' Homer describes the siege of Troy in the most glowing, attractive language. His great poetical successor, Virgil, shows much the same spirit in describing the subsequent wars of ^neas. 288 BRITISH POWER AND THOUGHT In Scripture history the Jewish wars with their Syrian neighbours are also narrated or alluded to with intense pride and admiration. These ancient historic narratives celebrate the glorious triumphs or disasters of warfare with the eloquent power of their different languages devoted to the same subject and apparently with much the same design. Its attendant miseries, ruinous losses, lifelong sufferings and calamities, many in their nature permanent, are comparatively little mentioned by either poets or historians when exciting themselves and trying to excite others by attractive descriptions or representa- tions of war. The splendid armour worn in ancient days, and the gorgeous uniforms of later times, to the present day, always hold a conspicuous place in the magnificent descriptions of ancient, mediaeval, and modern warfare. The charm of music is also often invoked in martial reviews or exercises, and in every other illustration of the military art during times of peace. The result seems evident enough. Despite the spirit and lessons of Christianity, the rapid increase of European education, and the extension of national intercourse, all changes likely to protest against the evils of warfare, its attractions especially, though not exclusively, among the young and spirited, BRITISH POWEE AND THOUGHT 289 induce civilised Europeans — the British as much as any — to sacrifice men, money, time, and every comfort of life to its ardent prosecution and encouragement. So intense, eager, and general is this enthusiasm in behalf of warfare that those who protest against it are hardly listened to with ordinary patience. -The histories of Napoleon's, Wellington's, and Marl- borough's campaigns, and that of more modern warriors written in the nineteenth century, have the usual effect of encouraging admiration for war rather than esteem for the blessings of peace. The best and brightest side of warfare is constantly placed before the public, while details of its lamentable realities or results are generally rather kept out of sight than brought into the notice they deserve. The object of such histories, besides the artistic aids of inspiriting music and pictures, is nearly always to make war as attractive as possible, and to withhold from the cause of peace the same ardent interest, admiration, and fanciful adornments. It may seem rather a contra- diction to philosophic students of Christian history to perceive that, while all connected with war, military reviews, martial training, new or improved artillery, and becoming uniforms are the delight of a majority in most Christian lands, their faith, u 290 BRITISH POWER AND THOUGHT expounded publicly every week — and, it is to be hoped, remembered during the week — advocates feelings of a directly opposite nature. The advance, besides, of civilisation, the great increase of national wealth, and the progress of general education evidently do little to diminish the attractions of warfare. On the con- trary, considering the present immense armies throughout Europe, and the national enthusiasm aroused by the Boer war, men seem as if returning to ancestral traditions of ' glorious war,' and inclined to prove that, despite religious changes, they wish to emulate their martial ancestry. While such is the feeling of many nations, it is evident that others, no matter how peaceably inclined, must to a certain extent follow the same example for the sake of in- dividual as well as national preservation. The love of war may be practically considered, therefore, a contagious state of mind. It would be suicidal for nations or individuals to advocate disarming, or expect to live unprotected amid armed neighbours, able, if not openly willing, to effect an easy conquest of helpless peace-lovers. This state of things in Christian countries ia not a gratifying fact for phil- anthropists or for conscientious, thoughtful men. As an eminent living historian says : ' War is not. BKITISH POWER AND THOUGHT 291 and never can be, a mere passionless discharge of a painful duty. Destruction is one of its chief ends. Deception is one of its chief means, and one of the great arts of skilful generalship is to deceive in order to destroy.' ' ' Lecky's Map of Life, p. 87. V 2 292 BRITISH POWER AND THOUGHT CHAPTEE XXIII Popularity of the war in South Africa throughout Britain and her colonies — Vast popularity of Queen Victoria — Her exemplary conduct and character more generally appreciated than ever before, at home and abroad. At the present period, when religious toleration so largely prevails, and when no rival Kings or Govern- ments are warring with each other throughout Europe, it is yet fully armed in most of its countries, and troops are ready for war at the shortest notice. The Boer war has not only stirred the British people to martial enthusiasm, but has evidently aroused the spirit of warfare throughout the entire nation. All the attractions of art, science, and literature at this enlightened time seem to yield somewhat suddenly in public interest to admiration for what is called military glory, to th« heroism of individuals, and to the supremacy of improved or successful artillery. A few quiet spirits in Britain tried to raise the ' Stop the war ' cry, and have eagerly declaimed against the undeniable miseries and heavy losses entailed by BRITISH POWER AND THOUGHT 293 warfare. But as a rule popular feeling is strongly against these speakers, and perhaps everything relating to warfare, its equipments, triumphs, and training, were never more attractive than now to the youth of Britain, though at a time of domestic peace. Shakspere's noble words, always more or less applic- able to human feelings, seem specially so during the close of the nineteenth and first year of the twentieth century : — Now all the youth of England are on fire, And silken dalliance in the wardrobe lies ; Now thrive the armourers, and honour's thought Eeigns solely in the breast of every man.' Shakspere occasionally introduces a singular pas- sage to amuse apparently a theatrical audience of his period, which without historical reference would show little wit or meaning. In the ' Merry Wives of Windsor,' ^ for instance, Falstaff exclaims. Let the sky rain potatoes ! at a period when these were unknown in Europe, though in Shakspere's time they had lately been discovered, and were, of course, a great rarity. Such an idea, therefore, as that of the sky raining potatoes ' Henry V. ° Act v. 294 BRITISH POWER AND THOUGHT might highly amuse a London audience, and this was likely Shakspere's object. In many of his plays he mentions warfare, its exploits, glories, and dangers, with eager admiration, while often praising the blessings of peace. He seems to view war as an inevitable necessity among nations, which should be encountered with the utmost heroism and perse- verance, yet he neither encourages love of foreign conquest nor enmity towards other nations. At his period, the French and the Spaniards were England's chief, perhaps the only, foes, yet he introduces none of the latter except Queen Katharine of Aragon, whom he makes noble and interesting ; while the French people in ' King John,' ' Henry V.,' and the passionate Dr. Caius in the ' Merry Wives of Windsor ' are none of them described in a spirit hostile to the French nation. Shakspere has apparently great sympathy with soldiers, if not with a military life. He would evidently like to see England thoroughly armed against foreign enemies, but inspires no desire for foreign conquests or territorial extension, while about colonial rule — the great question of the present day — Shakspere's period prevented his making much allusion. The admiration of, as well as the necessity for, the BRITISH POWER AND THOUGHT 295 terrible affliction of warfare would seem not to be eradicated from human nature. It is recorded always most prominently in the history of men, and has animated them alike under the various religions or forms of government which the race has believed or obeyed. War is an evil which in human attraction or requirement seems beyond the power of any religious or political influence to diminish or perma- nently remove. The admiration it arouses among most nations seems almost a second nature, and enlists all classes in its rewards and praises. In the midst of peace its popularity as well as necessity often overrule every other subject, and in this respect the philosophical history of war represented in Christian Europe shows surprisingly little change from the earliest records of other lands to the beginning of this century in Britain. Though a peaceable, indus- trious minority may deplore the event of warfare, it is clear from all history to the present day that its summons arouses an enthusiastic interest, if not delight, among a majority in the most civilised Christian nations. The fine arts are usually thought the results of a peaceful time, and to have a softening as well as a refining influence on men's minds ; yet they 296 BRITISH POWER AND THOUGHT often encourage a warlike spirit. The enthusiasm aroused by martial music, pictures, and poetry is evident enough in the history of the most civilised nations. As a rule their listeners, spectators, and readers under such influences incline far more to see the attractive and bright than the lamentable and gloomy side of warfare. Modern talent, ingenuity, art, science, and wealth alike contribute, generally Speaking, to make warfare seem attractive and glorious rather than sad and repelling. Its moral discouragement on principle is usually only attempted by a few philanthropic writers or preachers who ap- parently have little influence with the general public even in Christian countries, and despite all the lessons of history. Though Shakspere was never a soldier, yet passages in his martial play of 'Henry V.' express feelings and ideas which likely represent many a soldier's thoughts. While the language is Shakspere's, the feelings described are those of a soldier, in any country and during any period of warlike history. From camp to camp, through the foul womb of night, The hum of either army stilly sounds, That the fix'd sentinels almost receive The secret whispers of each other's watch : BEITISH POWEK AND THOUGHT 297 Fire answers fire, and through their paly flames Each battle sees the other's ninber'd face : Steed threatens steed in high and boastful neighs Piercing the night's dull ear : and from the tents, The armourers, accomplishing the knights, With busy hammers closing rivets up, Give dreadful note of preparation. At present the chief European nations, though well armed and constantly practising military exer- cises, are still at peace with each other, and have been so for several years. The war in South Africa, and the chance of another in China, are now mainly attracting British attention. In the latter country Britain and Eussia are acquiring increased influence, and are specially dreaded by its repelling, semi- barbarous inhabitants. European intrigues appear in great measure transferred lately from Turkey to China. In each country the Christian Powers would probably obtain complete control but for their mutual jealousies or opposing interests. British energy now seems chiefly devoted to southern Africa, and to the extreme east of Asia. In the first case it is resisted by the obstinate valour of European settlers, or rather of their descendants, and in the second it encounters the rival ambition and hostile interests of other Christian Powers. The reports of travellers 298 BRITISH POWEB AND THOUGHT and of newspaper correspondents, therefore, are now the most precious aids of British literature in a poli- tical sense. The evidence of history says little about either China or South Africa. Poetry and romance scarcely describe Chinese and Boer heroes and hero- ines. They are apparently among the most un- romantic of nations. In ancient maps their countries are only vaguely indicated, but latterly are most carefully set forth. They are each of comparatively modern interest and importance to Europe. The position of the American nations during the present complication of Asiatic and African questions seems of a very passive nature. Except the United States, America throughout its vast continent apparently takes no part whatever in the affairs of the Old World. The people of the United States alone stand forth as friends to the cause of civilisation in concert with other Christian Powers. The attention of modern British statesmen and of British literature seems chiefly devoted to China and to South Africa, while the large unoccupied armies of Continental Europe remain in watchful inaction. The warlike spirit in most Christian nations seems now to surpass all artistic or peaceful attractions in general interest, while military reviews, inventions, and exploits arouse BEITISH POWEE AND THOUGHT 299 far more popular delight than any other achievement in the power of man, even in this civilised age. During the last few years the chief objects of ambition, effort, and invention among most Christian nations are the improvement of warlike weapons, the full develop- ment of the military art in all its branches, and the encouragement of the military spirit in every way. Upon the subject of war civilised and uncivilised men show a somewhat similar spirit of eager, intense, and often reckless excitement. The miseries and heavy cost of warfare often seem hardly enough con- sidered till it is too late to avoid either. Nations rush into war, incurring immense expense thereby, with less knowledge sometimes of its cause or reason- ableness than would satisfy them in lawsuits or extensive speculations. The warlike spirit seems in fact like a second nature in many. Neither the enjoyments nor the enlightenment of civilised life can overcome or much diminish its extraordinary, attractive influence. During a short period about the middle of the last century, at the time of the great Industrial Exhibition in London, some quiet, sanguine men indulged the idea that war had lost or would soon lose its attraction among civilised people. Among others, an accomplished English historian 300 BRITISH POWER AND THOUGHT shared and expressed this view.' The expectation, however, was completely dispelled soon after it was mentioned, and up to the present time has been utterly disappointed. The hope was expressed by Mr. Buckle and others that the trading, commercial spirit becoming predominant in Britain would altogether oppose or quell that of warfare. This idea has been completely contradicted by European policy during the last fifty years. Mr. Lecky ^ states that the commercial spirit is now among the chief impulses towards territorial aggrandisement, adding that in hardly any period of her history has England annexed so much territory as in the last half-century. Yet Britain during all that time was ruled by no energetic warrior, but by one of the most peaceful and exemplary of female sovereigns. The recent wars waged by the British were no longer to gratify the ambition of warlike princes, but rather to pro- mote the commercial interests and security of a trading nation. Queen Victoria in a most re- markable way always understood and represented the views, feelings, wishes, and interests of her immense variety of subjects. Her conduct, therefore, ' Buckle's Civilisation. ' Democracy and Liberty, vol. i. BRITISH POWER AND THOUGHT 301 was always distinguished by a practical, unfailing sagacity, more and more acknowledged by her people as well as by foreign nations. She enjoyed a popu- larity different in cause, though not perhaps very unlike in public manifestation, from that enjoyed by Queen Elizabeth. The latter, while truly repre- senting the ruling majority and the established new form of Christianity, also represented the strongest national animosities. Elizabeth's enemies were among English and Irish subjects and foreign rivals. Her ambition, and perhaps the necessity of her position, were rather to defy or destroy than to reconcile her numerous foes. Loyal subjects longed to see her triumph over all opposing her. But hers was a triumph implacable and unmerciful over enemies who were equally so, during a time of religious and political dissensions of fearful violence. England's greatest poet and Elizabeth's admiring subject expresses in noble words what were likely the feelings of most of her English subjects, when an- ticipating her future reign in prophetic language : — She shall be loved and fear'd : her own shall bless her : Her foes shake like a field of beaten com, And hang their heads with sorrow.' ' Henry VIH. 802 BRITISH POWER AND THOUGHT These luckless foes were not only among her subjects, but included the French and Spaniards of that period. Shakspere's language evidently praises a warlike rather than a peaceful Queen, a sovereign who, instead of reconciling foreign foes or pacifying discontented subjects, had to defy both in a fierce contest of implacable and mutual enmity. Queen Victoria's foes were usually in Asia and Africa. Instead of ' hanging their heads with sorrow,' the late Queen's enemies, after the bitterness of defeat, usually had ample reason to prefer their changed lot under her rule to that under their native chiefs. Nearly all the wars or insurrections in Victoria's reign in which the British took part ended in complete reconcile- ment. The Queen was often attended by descendants of foreign foes belonging to distant nations. The cruel, somewhat vague desire to extirpate or despoil enemies, to enrich adherents, so prevalent during some of England's early wars, has yielded now to a desire to transform subdued foes into loyal subjects. This achievement, apparently so hopeless in the calm boldness of the design, succeeded during the reign of Victoria to a most remarkable, almost a wonder- ful, extent. The conduct and character of the Queen herself greatly aided not only to reconcile BRITISH POWER AND THOUGHT 303 but to attach foreign foes and British revolutionists to the name of England, and even to the cause of monarchy. No sovereign has seemed practically to so realise Shakspere's words describing the cares and trials of a monarch's position, and to more thoroughly devote time and thought to the performance of royal duty. All vanity and personal pride seemed unknown to her, as if she thoroughly felt the truth of Shak- spere's lines upon those in her envied, yet most trying position : — And what have kings that privates have not too, Save ceremony, save general ceremony ? And what art thou, thou idol ceremony ? What kind of god art thou, that suffer' st more Of mortal griefs than do thy worshippers ? What is thy soul, adoration ? Art thou aught else but place, degree, and form. Creating awe and fear in other men ? Wherein thou art less happy, being fear'd Than they in fearing ? . . . Can'st thou, when thou command'st the beggar's knee. Command the health of it ? No, thou proud dream, That play'st so subtly with a king's repose.' ' These noble lines describe with a power and beauty worthy of Shakspere alone the exact truth of a ' Henry V. Act iv. 304 BRITISH POWER AND THOUGHT sovereign's position, even among Christian subjects. The poet in his historical plays studies specially the cha- racters, thoughts, and feelings of reigning monarchs. King John, Eichard II., Henry IV., Henry V., and Richard III. in soliloquies express emotions withheld to a great extent from all around them. In each case there is revealed a singular mixture of responsibility, apprehension, and anxiety. The pride, happiness, and self-indulgence often associated with kings by zealous adherents or by republican foes appear completely replaced by the perilous realities of a monarch's posi- tion. Notwithstanding all the attractions of kingly power, the perplexed, nervous anxiety revealed by these kings, compared with their eager ambition before they became such, conveys a lesson evidently confirmed by historical truth. It is remarkable that Queen Victoria seemed peculiarly associated by the British public with the war against the Boers in South Africa, though she never was there, and at her advanced age British responsibility must rest far more with her ministers than during former years. Yet ' Soldiers of the Queen ' rather than of the nation or monarchy, is a popular song and popular expression in the London theatres and in the British press generally. In the Crimean BRITISH POWER AND THOUGHT 305 contest, and during the Sikh war and the Sepoy revolt in India, the British army was equally devoted to their country's interests, yet the Queen's name was never so much invoked as an incentive apparently to military exploit or political popularity. During the terrible campaigns against Napoleon the names of the British princes, George III. and the Prince Eegent, were never brought forward so prominently, or so personally associated, as it were, with the con- test. A more peaceful sovereign, it is well known, could hardly exist than the late Queen, yet in the interests of this extraordinary war with the Boers her august name is constantly mentioned, as if to invest the contest, if possible, with something of the same popularity which she herself always enjoyed during the long course of her exemplary life. The universal popularity of Queen Victoria was one of the most remarkable features of her time. From a historical point of view it was never before so generally enjoyed by any British, or perhaps by any foreign, sovereign. She evidently was peculiarly fitted, as well as destined, for a time of domestic peace, instead of civil war or foreign invasion, which were the two great dangers to Queen Elizabeth. The fierce energy of Margaret of Anjou in X 306 BRITISH POWER AND THOUGHT behalf of her husband and son slain by their royal cousins in the civil war of York and Lancaster, and the heroism of Elizabeth exhorting her troops to action against the expected Spanish invasion, were trials from which Queen Victoria was completely exempted. She was, in fact, the ideal Queen of a powerful yet peace- ful country at home, and of an industrial age. Though living in a democratic period, when the errors or sins not only of foreign rulers but of her own ancestry are criticised with a freedom hitherto unknown, Victoria yet won the respect of patriotic republicans, while confirming the loyalty of those imbued with monarchical principles. The profound esteem with which she was honoured by an enormous majority of her varied subjects found its hardly exaggerated mani- festation whenever she appeared in public. The late Queen, despite her advanced age, and all the trials she experienced, to borrow a familiar modern phrase, seemed always equal to the occasion, in the most exalted sense of that expression. During her eventful life she was surrounded by a long succession of able, sometimes of peculiar statesmen. She personally knew more foreign sovereigns and foreign statesmen than any previous British King or Queen had ever the opportunity of meeting. In personal conduct, in high BRITISH POWER AND THOUGHT 307 sense of her public responsibility, and in the patient, steady performance of every royal duty, from con- sulting ministers and visiting sick or wounded soldiers, to holding brilliant drawing-rooms and presiding over public receptions, this conscientious, energetic sovereign steadily set the very highest example. No religious advisers holding monarchical principles could have suggested a better or wiser course than she pursued in every department of life, and evi- dently from her natural inclination. The late Queen seemed in herself to represent the power, the unity, and the prosperity of modern England. Her long reign never witnessed foreign invasion or domestic revolution. It was a period of remarkable peace and quiet at home, considering the vast foreign conquests and successful enterprises of almost every kind accomplished by her subjects. The enthusiastic welcome which always greeted her appearance in public might have been thought by strangers to proceed partly from mere excitement, but was really the outward and visible sign of that profound and reasoning national esteem which was the inevitable accompaniment as well as the natural result of an exemplary life, both public and private. When the late Queen's conduct is considered in each of these X 2 308 BRITISH POWER AND THOUGHT capacities, together with her vast political influence and moral supremacy, she may well be said to have represented both British power and thought in their most beneficent exercise. PRINTED BY BPOTTISWOODE ASD CO. LTD., HEW-9TREET S(J0ABB LONDON WORKS by the Hon. ALBERT S. G. CANNING. RELIGIOUS STRIFE IN BRITISH HISTORY. Smith, Elder, & Co., Waterloo Place, London. ' Mr. Canning's account of these religious conflicts and proscrip- tions does equal and impartial justice.' — Daily News. ' A very temperate exposition of the evils of religious persecu- tion.' — The Tablet. ' Mr. Canning has displayed much fairness and ability.' — Eock. 'We have in "Religious Strife in British History" one of the most lucid expositions of religious life and thought in our own country that has seen the light for some time past.' — Christian Union. PHIL080PHT OF THE WAVERLET NOVELS. Smith, Elder, & Co. ' This volume estimates very truly and fairly the moral and intellectual qualities of the great novelist.' — Scotsman. ' There are few who will rise from its perusal without feeling that they understand Scott better than they did before.' — The Queen. ' Mr. Canning dissects the several novels, sketching the plots examining the characters, pointing out defects and excellences, and we can endorse most of his conclusions as opportune and judicious.' Literary Churchman. PHILOSOPHY OF CHARLES DICKENS. Smith, Elder, & Co. ' Mr. Canning has produced a pleasing book. He has shed much light on Dickens's genius and methods, and we heartily thank him for his volume.' — British Quarterly Review. ' We have to thank Mr. Canning for a very agreeable book.' The Globe. 1 WOBKS BY THE HON. ALBERT S. G. CANNING ' The book is admirably suited for lectures at an institute ; it will recall the plots to those who have forgotten them ; it will incite others to read Dickens in preference to trash.' — The Gbaphio. ' A book full to overflowing with true criticism and sound common sense.'— The English Chubohman. MAOATJLAY, ESSAYIST AND HISTORIAN. Smith, Eldee, & Co. ' Mr. Canning describes the purpose and scope of each of the Essays, traces the outlines, and sums up the general conclusions of the history with praiseworthy fidelity.' — Scotsman. ' Mr. Canning's little book is admirable.' — Moeninq Post. ' This is a book of rare merit, clear, concise, and instructive.' Whitehall Eeview. ' Probably no single volume, lately published, will do more, few so much, towards placing the character of Lord Macaulay as a litterateur fairly before the English reader.' — Yokkshike Post. THOUGHTS ON BHAKSPERE'S HISTORICAL PLAYS. W. H. Allen & Co., Waterloo Place, London. ' It is in fact a, painstaking and intelligent interpretation of the plays in modern English prose.' — Scotsman, March 22nd, 1884. Mr, Canning has brought much scholarship and research, as well as thoughtful study, to his work. A sketch of each play is given. The analyses are all so good that it is almost invidious to select.' — LiTEBAKY WoELD, May 9th, 1884. ' Discrimination, erudition, and refined discernment have been given to the production of this excellent work.' — Whitehall Review. ' Mr. Canning possesses claims to consideration that justly belong to but few of his predecessors in the field.' — Moeninq Post, June 23rd, 1884. 2 WOEKS BY THE HON. ALBERT S. G. CANNING EEVOLTED IRELAND, 1798 AND 1803. W. H. Allen & Co. From Mr. Leoky, Author of ' History of England in the Eighteenth Century,' &a. &o. ' Athenseum Club. — Mr. Leoky begs to thank Mr. Albert Canning very sincerely for his kind present, and he has been reading it with great pleasure and admiration.' ' Among recent books and pamphlets relating to Ireland one of the most useful is the Hon. A. S. G. Canning's "Eevolted Ireland." Mr. Canning's clear and dispassionate inquiry is of great value just now. The application of the historical lesson to the present political situation is plain and legible on every page.'— Satukdat Eeview, June l^th, 1887. ' It is interesting to turn to the instructive and impartial pages of Mr. Canning. His little book " Bevolted Ireland" is that rare but almost unique thing in literature — a sketch in Irish history un- coloured by religious or political partisanship. It will be read with profit.' — Scotsman, September 11th, 1886. LITERARY IN"FLtrENCE IN BRITISH HISTORY. W. H. Allen & Co. ' This is a useful compendium on an interesting subject. Mr. Canning's brief summary will be found exceedingly convenient.' — PuBLisHEBs' CiBOULAR, November 15th, 1889. ' The soundness of Mr. Canning's judgment, his nice sense of historical perspective, and his neat literary style make his work enjoyable in no common degree.' — Scotsman, August 9th, 1889. The writer's modest hope that his book may be useful to readers not familiar with larger works on the subject is not perhaps unreasonable. There are passages in it which such a reader may read with profit.' — The Spectator, November 11th, 1889. ' No page of this book is open to anything but praise.' — Glasgow Hekald, August 12lh, 1889. 3 WORKS BY THE HON. ALBEET S. G. CANNING ' This volume will be found eminently useful, and it is certainly written in a pleasant and lucid style.' — Public Opinion, January 10th, 1890. ' The tone of the book is very impartial, and the literary judgments seem to us remarkably sound.' — The Tablet, August 31st, 1889. ' We find page after page of suggestive remarks and biographical touches, which stimulate thought and contribute to genuine literary enjoyment.' — Belfast Northern Whig, October 7th, 1889. ' The author reviews in bright, entertaining style representative literature of every period of English history.' — Liverpool Courier, February 8th, 1890. THOUGHTS ON RELIQIOUS HISTORT. Eden, Eemington, & Co., King Street, Covent Garden, London. ' Mr. Canning is always a thoughtful and instructive writer. The passages that he collects from the works of great writers on the position of the Jews in history are full of interest.' — The Observer August 2nd, 1891. ' Mr. Canning is evidently a fair-minded man, and writes in a spirit of charity. He strives to deal even-handed justice to each party as it passes under review.' — The Scotsman, Azigust Srd, 1891. ' Mr. Canning's workmanship is eminently scholarly and thought- ful.' — The People, August 2nd, 1891. ' The work is characterised by a rare impartiality and an obvious desire to take wide views, and paint both the sunshine and shadow of religious history.' — The Jewish Chronicle, October 2nd, 1891. ' The picturesque and entertaining style of this scholarly work is the more striking because of the dispassionate comparison of con- flicting authorities, and the painstaking research, the actual hard study and reflection that have necessarily been bestowed on its production.' — Whitehall Eeview, September 26th, 1891. ' A sensible and evenly-balanced summary of the world's religions. It shows with much clearness and judgment the relations in which Paganism, Christianity, and Mohammedanism stood to each other in the past, and the place of Judaism in the march of religious pro- 4 WOEKS BY THE HON. ALBEET S. G. CANNING gress. Mr. Canning is certainly sincere, honest, and thoughtful in his appreciations of the faiths of the past and present.' The Graphic, October 1891. ' There is really a good deal of information to be derived from this little book.' — The Woeld, August 1891. ' The evils of intolerant dogmatism are dispassionately criticised, while the writer is singularly free from the extravagance and cap- tiousness so commonly associated with the criticism of religion. — Manchester Guardian, July 2Sth, 1891. "WORDS ON EXISTING RELIGIONS: A HISTORICAL SKETCH. W. H. Allen & Co., Limited. ' Full of sincere appreciation of the many elements of truth in various ancient and modern religious systems.' — The Guardian, May 2iih, 1893. ' Mr. Canning, a most fair-minded and impartial writer, has evidently read widely and has collected in his pages many important and useful facts.' — Eecord, July 28ife, 1893. ' The book is evidently the result of much labour and wide reading, and the author shows considerable skill and discrimination in drawing from his somewhat numerous authorities. Though writing from a professedly Christian standpoint, he deals fairly and sympathetically with the other religions that he touches upon. The attention which has latterly been devoted to the comparative study of religion is one of the most remarkable features of the thought of the century, and those who are curious to know what the results of that study of them are, will find them admirably summarised in Mr. Canning's book.' — Scotsman, March 20th, 1893. ' Gives a very just and sympathetic survey of the world's religions.' — Daily Chronicle, April 8th, 1893. ' These thoughtful and instructive essays wiU do something to popularise this wider and nobler view.' — Bradford Observer, May 5th, 1893. ' An interesting and instructive volume, characterised by profound thought and great research.'— Belfast News Letter, April 12th, 1893. 5 WOBKS BY THE HON. ALBEET S. G. CANNING THE DIVIDED IRISH. W. H. Allen & Co. ' One cannot but admire the tone of charity and justice which pervades this work from beginning to end.' — The National Oesekvek September 1894. ' One of the most valuable books which the present year has produced.' — Ieish Times, November 23rd, 1894. ' We can heartily recommend a perusal of this work, for Mr. Canning shows that he has a great grasp on his subject by his luci- dity, his shrewdness, and his fairness.' — Public Opinion, July 1894. ' This book is one which everyone should read who wants to understand Irish political movements, and the parts played in history by Irish political factious.' — The Scotsman, July 1894. ' Mr. Canning's book may be commended to all Englishmen who want to understand Irish history, and to all Irishmen who care for the amelioration of their country.' Manohesteb Guardian, August 1894. ' Mr. Canning treats of " Divided Ireland" up to date and from all points of view ; in doing so he has consulted a large number of authorities of most diverse opinions, so that this re-issue of his book will be found really helpful by all interested in the relations of England and its sister island.' Publisheks' Oxboulab, July 28th, 1894. EELiaiOXJS DEVELOPMENT: A HISTORIO-Ai SKETCH. W. H. Allen & Co. ' The political aspects of the question are considered from an impartial Christian standpoint, and we recognise the general value of Mr. Canning's mode of treatment.' — The Guabdian. ' We heartily commend the work to all thoughtful and discrimina- tive readers.' — Public Opinion. ' Distinguished throughout by the impartiality of a sincere inquiry, and it wiU be read with profit by everyone interested in its subject.'— Scotsman. 6 "WORKS BY THE HON. ALBEET S. G. CANNING ' This thoughtful and dispassionate survey of the growth and influence of religious thought may be read with interest and profit by all students of history.' — Libekty Eeview. ' A studious, comprehensive, conscientious, Christian-spirited book.' — Whitehall Review. HISTOET IN FACT AND FICTION: A LITERARY SKETCH. Smith, Eldbk, & Co. ' The work will be read with interest and profit.' Scotsman, Jan. 1897. ' I do not think I ever saw the difficulties of the Eastern Question in so clear a light as I did after reading the short chapter which Mr. Canning devotes to it.' — Pall Mall Gazette, Jan. 1897. ' We recommend " History in Fact and Fiction " as a valuable work.' — Public Opinion, Feb. 1897. ' Excellent reading for all sorts and conditions of men is liberally provided.'— The People, Feb. 1897. ' The title gives but u faint idea of the main theme of a most interesting work.' — Livebpool Coukieb, Jime 1897. ' Mr. Canning's knowledge of modem literature is so wide that he is able to criticise almost every well-known name for purposes of illustration.' — School Guaedian, Augiist 1897. ' People who have no time to plod through the great histories, if they take up this book will gain much historical knowledge.' Lloid's Weekly Newspaper, Feb. 1897. ' A delightful contribution to the historical literature of the day.' MoKNiNG Adveetisee, June 1897. ' The Hon. Albert Canning deals with conspicuous fairness and in an interesting way with the conflicts between the historic religions of the world.' — Jewish Cheonicle, Feb. Sth, 1897. ' Whatever Mr. Canning discusses he is distinguished by dis- passionate candour.' — Eecoed, August 20ife, 1897. A valuable contribution to historical philosophy.' Parents' Review, April 1897. 7 WOEKS BY THE HON. ALBERT S. G. CANNING ' This Is a very readable work. Tiie author exhibits in a lively, instructive manner the respective positions of Paganism in ancient Eome, Hinduism, Buddhism, Mahometanism in Asia and Africa, the Jewish system throughout the various nations of the world, and the Christian system in Europe and America. The work merits a very careful perusal.' — Asiatic. Quabtekly Eeview, Jan. 1898. BRITISH RULE AND MODERN" POLITIC 3: A HISTORICAL STUDY. Smith, Eldek, & Co. ' An examination of the effect of English literature upon modern politics and national thought, which as far as we are aware is a distinctly new departure, and one which in Mr. Canning's able hands is eminently successful.' — Westminster Eeview, February 1899. ' It is a book that touches a great subject in such a way as to give any careful reader a grasp of the salient points.' — Lloyd's Weekly, November 21th, 1898. ' The book contains many sound views regarding the present situation in Europe, and is a very readable estimate of the beneficial results of British rule.' — Liteeaby Wokld, December 1898. ' As a literary critic Mr. Canning has few superiors to-day.' — Manohestek Coukiee, November 1898. ' Those who have perused other works by the same author will not need to be told that much scholarship, research, and thought have been brought to bear on the treatise.' — Liverpool Codeiek, Febnuiry 1899. 'Mr. Canning's "British Eule and Modern Politics" is a most instructive and satisfying commentary upon past and present.' — Ieish Times, January 1899. ' A careful and eminently judicial survey of some of the principal tendencies which have been and are at work, with illustrations from English literature.' — The Gdaedian, April 1899. •■ As a popular historical study of modern politics it is certainly a book to possess.' — Poblishees' Cieculae, December 1898. 8