History of English Literature Volume 3 (of 3)Taine, Hippolyte
History
History of English Literature Volume 3 (of 3)
Taine, Hippolyte
English literature -- History and criticism
feels itself born to command and to crush opposition, whom an invincible
bent rouses against the law or the right which restrains him, who
oppresses from a sort of inner craving, and who is made to govern as a
sword is to strike. He shows in Charles the innate respect for royalty,
the belief in divine right, the rooted conviction that every
remonstrance or demand is an insult to his crown, an outrage on his
rights, an impious and criminal sedition. Thenceforth we see in the
strife of king and parliament but the strife of two doctrines; we cease
to take an interest in one or the other, to take an interest in both; we
are spectators of a drama; we are no longer judges at a trial. But it is
a trial which Macaulay conducts before us; he takes a side in it; his
account is the address of a public prosecutor before the court, the most
entrancing, the most acrimonious, the best reasoned, that was ever
written. He approves of the condemnation of Strafford; he honors and
admires Cromwell; he exalts the character of the Puritans; he praises
Hampden to such a degree that he calls him the equal of Washington; he
has no words scornful and insulting enough for Laud; and what is more
terrible, each of his judgments is justified by as many quotations,
authorities, historic precedents, arguments, conclusive proofs, as the
vast erudition of Hallam, or the calm dialectics of Macintosh could have
assembled. Judge of this transport of passion and this withering logic
by a single passage:
"For more than ten years the people had seen the rights which were
theirs by a double claim, by immemorial inheritance and by recent
purchase, infringed by the perfidious King who had recognized them. At
length circumstances compelled Charles to summon another parliament:
another chance was given to our fathers: were they to throw it away as
they had thrown away the former? Were they again to be cozened by _le
Roi le veut?_ Were they again to advance their money on pledges which
had been forfeited over and over again? Were they to lay a second
Petition of Right at the foot of the throne, to grant another lavish aid
in exchange for another unmeaning ceremony, and then to take their
departure, till, after ten years more of fraud and oppression, their
prince should again require a supply and again repay it with a perjury?
They were compelled to choose whether they would trust a tyrant, or
conquer him. We think that they chose wisely and nobly.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account