Passages of a Working Life during Half a Century
Chapter XIII
CHAPTER XIII.
THE narrative of my publishing enterprises was, in Chapter
VIII., brought up to 1855; with the exception of the two most important works of my later
years, the “English
Cyclopædia” and the “Popular History of England.” In these undertakings I had a proprietary
interest, although, as I stated in the Preface to the present book, “I had to
become more a writer and an editor than a publisher.” I have reserved a brief
account of these works until I should arrive, in the natural sequence of these
‘Passages,’ at the periods of their completion. The eight years that were
occupied by the superintendence of the Cyclopædia—during seven of
which I was also occupied in writing the History—bring me to the termination of the Half
Century of my Working Life.
One of the most interesting novels of Sir Edward
Bulwer Lytton is entitled “What
will he do with it?” When, in 1848, after the completion of the
“Penny Cyclopædia,” I had
parted with the stock and stereotype plates, the copyright remained in my hands. It had
cost a large sum of money; of its literary value no one doubted; but its commercial value
remained to be tested. “What will he do with it?” said the Trade. I
turned it to account in an
Ch. XIII.] | THE THIRD EPOCH. | 271 |
abridgment entitled the “National Cyclopædia.” In this the original work was melted
down to one-fourth of its dimensions. It was a useful book, but it was far from satisfying
the requirements of those who sought in a Cyclopædia to supply the place of a small
library. From this “National Cyclopædia” of too
scanty dimensions, I turned my attention towards producing one of larger proportions even
than the original work. The “Imperial Cyclopædia,” of
which a Prospectus was largely circulated, was proposed to be divided into eight or ten
great compartments, each of which was to be prefaced by a treatise by some eminent writer.
It would have been a large undertaking, but I had assurances of support from persons of
influence, encouraging enough, but not sufficiently numerous to lead me onward to a great
risk. Some of the letters of these supporters are before me. One of them is so
characteristic of a nobleman who had an hereditary love of science, and a natural devotion
to literature, that I may be pardoned the egotism of its insertion. Lord Ellesmere writes to me on the 19th of June,
1850:—“I shall direct my bookseller to furnish the volumes as they come out,
as I look upon your professional labours as among the best exertions of the day for
fighting the devil and all his works.” Lord
Ellesmere’s cordial letter to me was his answer to my proposal to
publish by subscription. This plan, by which authors and publishers took hostages against
evil fortune, was in general use during the first half of the eighteenth century. Like most
other human things it was subject to abuse; but it was founded upon a true estimate of the
peculiar risks of publishing. It is manifest that, if a certain number of persons unite 272 | PASSAGES OF A WORKING LIFE: | [Ch. XIII. |
in agreement to purchase a book which is about to be printed, the
author may be at ease with regard to the issue of the enterprise; and the subscribers ought
to receive what they want, at a lower cost than when risk enters into price. For more than
half a century nearly all the great books were published by subscription; and the highest
in literature felt no degradation in themselves canvassing with their subscription
receipts. The plan which, upon the face of it, was a just one for all parties—a fair
exchange between seller and buyer—came in process of time to be regarded with suspicion.
The practice of soliciting subscriptions which, in Pope, and Steele, and Johnson, and fifty other eminent authors, was legitimate
and honourable, was in the next century either treated with cold neglect, or regarded with
the same suspicion as the devices of the begging-letter writer. I quickly found out my
mistake, and united myself with a publishing house who had the means of largely circulating
a serial work throughout the kingdom.
I have devoted two Chapters of my second volume to the history of the
“Penny Cyclopædia.” I have
there described the labours of the various Contributors, and have recorded some
characteristic traits of the eminent persons who were associated in this work. It was
completed in 1844. In the nine years that elapsed between that period and the commencement
of the “English Cyclopæia,”
knowledge of all kinds had been accumulating at a rate of marvellous rapidity. The
geographical descriptions, for example, of the “Penny
Cyclopædia,” had stopped short of the wonderful development of the
Australian colonies. The new Cyclopædia was arranged in four divisions,
Ch. XIII.] | THE THIRD EPOCH. | 273 |
Geography, Natural History, Biography, Arts and Sciences. The two
first of these Divisions were proceeding at the same time, and were each completed in two
years and a half. What a store of new materials had been gathering together, for the use of
the Geographer and the Naturalist, that required to be set forth in the remodelled
Cyclopædia! These two Divisions were succeeded by that of Biography. If no other additions
had been required than the introduction of names of living persons, the new literary labour
would have been of no small amount—sufficient indeed to form a separate book, not so large
but essentially as complete as the ‘Biographie des
Contemporains.’ This Biographical Division, in six volumes, was completed
in 1858. The Division of Arts and Sciences included a great amount of miscellaneous
subjects, not capable of being introduced into the more precise arrangement of the three
previous departments. It was completed in eight volumes in 1861. In my Introduction to the
eighth volume, I said—“it has been produced the last in the series, that nothing
of new invention and discovery in Science—nothing of progressive improvement in the
Arts—might be omitted.”
In the conduct of this work I adopted two principles; first that not an
article, not a page, not a line, should be reprinted without revision; secondly, that every
new Contributor should be so reliable in his talents and his acquirements, that his
articles might be safely adopted without undergoing that superintendence which the Useful
Knowledge Society professed to undertake for the “Penny Cyclopædia,” and which was often very
judiciously exerted. Noticing the Contributors to the earlier work, when I
274 | PASSAGES OF A WORKING LIFE: | [Ch. XIII. |
was writing these “Passages” in 1863, I was looking back
twenty years. There was a sort of historical interest attached to many of these names, and
I could speak of them unreservedly and without any invidious distinction. It is not so with
the Contributors to a work which was only completed three years before the time when I am
now writing. My own duties in the conduct of the work involved little more than a general
superintendence. In the Preface to the Natural History Division I acknowledge my
obligations to Dr. Edwin Lankester, who had brought
the original articles into a more systematic shape; who had removed much that was obsolete;
and who, having access to the opinions, and securing the assistance, of the best living
authorities, had neglected no new materials that were at that time available. I had
further, at the close of the work, to thank my fellow-labourers during many years—Mr. A. Ramsay and Mr. J.
Thorne—for the active and intelligent share they had taken in its
management, by which the regularity of publication, and the correctness of the text, had
been mainly secured.
I might probably have been induced to say more of the plan and conduct of
this book—which, without arrogance, I may call a great book,—had I not been able to refer
for further details to one of the most learned and interesting articles that ever appeared
in a critical work—“The History of
Cyclopædias,” in the “Quarterly Review” for April, 1863. Of the commendation of this writer I have just cause to be proud, for it is founded
upon an acquaintance, little less than extraordinary, with the Cyclopædias of all countries
and languages, of far-removed or of recent times. I am satisfied that he speaks from an
honest
Ch. XIII.] | THE THIRD EPOCH. | 275 |
conviction alone, when he says—“the ‘English Cyclopædia’ is a work
that as a whole has no superior and very few equals of its kind; that, taken by itself,
supplies the place of a small library; and, used in a large library, is found to
present many points of information that are sought in vain in any other cyclopædia in
the English language.” The “Quarterly
Review” is chiefly addressed to those who have leisure and abundant means; but
there is another class to whom the “English
Cyclopædia” is strongly recommended as a book for those who labour with their
hands, and have little time for systematic study. In the “Working Men’s College Magazine” for November,
1861, there is an article signed V. Lushington, for
which I have abstained from offering my thanks, for I feel that to express personal
gratitude to a critic is to imply that other considerations than those of truth and justice
may have suggested his praise. I cannot probably, however, better conclude my notice of a
work which has brought me abundant honour, than by giving an eloquent passage from this
notice. It will be seen that Mr. Lushington is not one of those who
think it necessary to write down to the comprehension of working men:—“Perhaps the
first sensation of the reader on opening these massive volumes will be one of
bewilderment, and unwillingness to traverse any such mountain of knowledge. But on
better consideration he will feel two things; first, that kind of reverence which the
spectacle of any great human labour cannot but call forth; and secondly, that this (or
indeed any) Cyclopædia is a witness to the inexhaustible interest of reality and simple
truth. He will see that it is in fact a record of a thousand thousand conquests over
276 | PASSAGES OF A WORKING LIFE: | [Ch. XIII. |
thick night, won in many generations by far-reaching
industry, and patient intelligence, in many cases even—say the discovery of America—by
downright unmistakeable valour: and so gazing on these columns, there may come flashing
through his mind something of the exultation with which a people greets a victorious
army returning homeward. At least he cannot but observe how the age in which we live is
assiduously minding and doing her business; everywhere extending and consolidating
positive knowledge; with honest sober eyes scrutinising the past of human history,
studying the starry heavens, the solid earth, and all living things, tracking
everywhere the dominion of stedfast laws, then recording what is found, for ourselves
and for those who come after. A Cyclopædia witnesses that all these things are being
done.”
In 1854 I was instigated by an article in “The Times” seriously to contemplate the task of writing a
general history of England. Lord John Russell had
delivered an address at Bristol on the study of history, and the leading journal took up
the subject of the noble speaker’s complaint “that we have no other history
of England than Hume’s”—that
“when a young man of eighteen asks for a history of England, there is no
resource but to give him Hume.” I had published “The Pictorial History of England” some years
before—in many respects a valuable history, but one whose limits had gone far beyond what,
as its projector, I had originally contemplated. I altogether rejected the idea of making
an abridgment of that history. Many materials for a History of the
People had been collected by me
Ch. XIII.] | THE THIRD EPOCH. | 277 |
without any immediate
object of publication. The remarks of “The
Times” led me to depart from my original design of writing a Domestic
History of England apart from its Public History. Upon a more extended plan, I would
endeavour to trace through our long continued annals the essential connection between our
political history and our social. To accomplish this, I would not keep the People in the
background, as in many histories, and I would call my work “The Popular History of England.”
For more than a year I was gradually preparing for my task, and was ready
to begin the printing at the end of 1855. It was to be published in monthly parts. My
publishers desiring that the first part should contain an introduction, setting forth the
objects of a new history of England, I was induced to explain my motives for undertaking
it, with a sincerity which perhaps may be deemed imprudent. It may be as imprudent for the
historian as for the statesman to make any general profession of principles at the onset of
his career. The succession of events in either case might modify his past convictions. But
I have no reason to depart in letter or spirit from what I wrote: “The People, if
I understand the term rightly, means the Commons of these realms, and not any distinct
class or section of the population. Ninety years ago, Goldsmith called the ‘middle order of mankind’ the
‘People,’ and those below them the ‘Rabble.’ We have outlived
all this. A century of thought and action has widened and deepened the foundations of
the State. This People, then, want to find, in the history of their country, something
more than a series of annals, either of policy or war. In connection with a faithful
278 | PASSAGES OF A WORKING LIFE: | [Ch. XIII. |
narrative of public affairs, they want to learn their own
history—how they have grown out of slavery, out of feudal wrong, out of regal
despotism,—into constitutional liberty, and the position of the greatest estate of the
realm.”
In the summer of 1858 I had completed four volumes of my history, reaching
the period of the Revolution of 1688. In the postscript to the fourth volume I endeavoured
to illustrate the principle, so well defined by my friend Mr.
Samuel Lucas in a Lecture on Social Progress, that the history of every
nation “has been in the main sequential”—that each of its phases has
been “the consequence of some prior phase, and the natural prelude of that which
succeeded it.” I pointed out that the early history of the Anglican Church
was to be traced in all the subsequent elements of our ecclesiastical condition; that upon
the Roman and Saxon civilization were founded many of the principles of government which
still preserved their vitality; that the Norman despotism was absorbed by the Anglo-Saxon
freedom; and that the recognition of the equal rights of all men before the Law was the
only mode by which feudality could maintain itself. “From the deposition of
Richard the Second to the abdication of
James the Second, every act of national
resistance was accomplished by the union of classes, and was founded upon some
principle of legal right for which there was legal precedent. Out of the traditional
and almost instinctive assertion of the popular privileges, have come new developments
of particular reforms, each adapted to its own age, but all springing out of that
historical experience which we recognise as Constitutional.”
Ch. XIII.] |
THE THIRD EPOCH. |
279 |
In November, 1862, I completed the book upon which I had been employed
unremittingly for a seventh part of my working life. I then stated in a postscript that,
with the exception of three chapters on the Fine Arts, “The Popular History” had been wholly written by
myself. Being the production of one mind, I trusted that the due proportions of the
narrative, from the first chapter to the last, had been maintained. I again set forth the
principles which had enabled me to carry it through with a consistent purpose.
“Feeling my responsibilities to be increased by the fact that my duty was to
impart knowledge and not to battle for opinions, my desire has been to cherish that
love of liberty which is best founded upon a sufficient acquaintance with its gradual
development and final establishment amongst us; to look with a tolerant judgment even
upon those who have sought to govern securely by governing absolutely; to trace with
calmness the efforts of those who have imperilled our national independence by foreign
assault or domestic treason, but never to forget that a just love of country is
consistent with historical truth; to carry forward, as far as within the power of one
who has watched joyfully and hopefully the great changes of a generation, that spirit
of improvement, which has been more extensively and permanently called forth in the
times of which this concluding volume treats than in the whole previous period from the
Revolution of 1688.”
This exposition of the views with which I commenced and concluded
“The Popular History”
may appear to be set forth with undue formality. I think my reasons for so doing will be
attributed to something better than the egotism of authorship. If the
280 | PASSAGES OF A WORKING LIFE: | [Ch. XIII. |
course of my narrative through four thousand pages had been inconsistent with these
declarations—if it had been conducted in a spirit opposed to the best authorities on our
constitutional history—I should have deserved to be judged out of my own mouth. In a review
of a reviewer who appears to consider my history as the embodiment of all the dangerous
principles of democracy, I find this passage in “The Times” of November 1, 1864:—“Mr.
Kebbel does really allege with much justice that the fundamental error
of Mr. Knight’s history, is the theory
according to which the people of this country are represented as having been from the
beginning divided into two hostile armies, the one seeking to defend or to augment, the
other to diminish or destroy, a mass of oppressive and tyrannous privileges and
customs. The proofs that Mr. Knight maintains this heresy, and
that it is a heresy, we do not enter into.” That I have not maintained this
heresy without very important modifications, I fearlessly assert. That I have been one of
those who have told the people “of the grandeur of resistance,” without
telling them “something of the grandeur of obedience,” I utterly deny.
But I cannot admit that it is a “fundamental error” to represent the people as
long divided into the maintainers and the opposers of “oppressive and tyrannous
privileges and customs.” If in this particular I am a heretic, let me, in
some measure, defend myself by the example of other heretics.
The early years of the Conquest provide ample evidence of Norman
oppression and Saxon resistance. Whether the oppressions were those of the king or of his
military chieftains, their consequence was insurrection. William went on from mildness to
Ch. XIII.] | THE THIRD EPOCH. | 281 |
ferocity, from a
show of justice to the most lawless exercise of power. “It is a fearful and
disgusting history. It would be humiliating to feel that the people from whom we are
sprung did not turn and rend ‘this very stark man and very savage’—this man
‘stark beyond all bounds to those who withsaid his will,’—did we not know
that no oppression could ultimately subdue this long-suffering race, and that the
instruments of their partial subjection were, in little more than a century, united
with them in building up a system of government which should, at every new storm of
tyranny, become stronger and more defiant.”* One of the greatest of English
orators has described the barons of the reign of John.
Lord Chatham, in his speech of 1770, in the case of
John Wilkes, said:—“It is to your
ancestors, my Lords, it is to the English Barons that we are indebted for the Laws and
Constitution we possess. Their virtues were rude and uncultivated, but they were great
and sincere. Their understandings were as little polished as their manners, but they
had hearts to distinguish right from wrong; they had heads to distinguish truth from
falsehood; they understood the rights of humanity, and they had spirit to maintain
them.” The historian of our
Constitutional history says:—“From this era a new soul was infused into the people
of England.” During the six hundred and fifty years which have elapsed since
the day of Runnemede, they have carried on the battle for liberty in the same practical and
temperate spirit which animated the mailed knights who won the Great Charter. In “the
grandeur
282 | PASSAGES OF A WORKING LIFE: | [Ch. XIII. |
of resistance” they have not lost sight of “the
grandeur of obedience.” Over and over again they have been “divided
into two hostile armies.” But reconcilement has gradually come out of
disunion; and for why? Resistance has almost invariably proceeded from the necessity of the
case. There may be essential differences of opinion as to the force of that necessity,
whether the two leading examples of resistance—the Great Rebellion and the Revolution—be
considered. But I apprehend—now that the doctrine of passive obedience has ceased to be
advocated, even by those who consider a Popular History dangerous—that it will be generally
acknowledged that “the peculiarity of the British Constitution is this—that its
only professed object is the general good, and its only foundation the general will.
Hence the people have a right, acknowledged from time immemorial, fortified by a pile
of statutes, and authenticated by a revolution that speaks louder than them all, to see
whether abuses have been committed, and whether their properties and their liberties
have been attended to as they ought to be.”* This is the resistance of modern
times. Of the elder spirit Burke says:—“It
has a pedigree and illustrating ancestors. It has its bearings and its ensigns
armorial. It has its gallery of portraits, its monumental inscriptions, its records,
evidences, and titles.” When we enter upon the eighteenth and nineteenth
centuries, the pedigree may be somewhat blurred and mildewed; the ancestors may look as
impossible to be imitated in their actions as in their costumes; the gallery of portraits
may be little
Ch. XIII.] | THE THIRD EPOCH. | 283 |
better than imaginary. Their successors come nearer to our common
life. The hostile armies are differently constituted. The serf no longer exists; the
burgher fights by the side of the noble; the artisan is coming forward to assert his equal
rights before the Law. The battle against oppression is no longer to be fought in tented
fields. It is the battle of public opinion, which, in the cause of justice and right, will
ever be victorious. I should become tedious if I were to linger over the earlier times when
Public Opinion was, as yet, the Hercules in the cradle.
If I have committed a “fundamental error” in my alleged representations of
society as divided into two hostile armies, I have at least endeavoured in treating of the
past, to keep steadily in view its certain influence upon the future. “I have
tried to evolve the conviction that through many long and painful struggles, we have
been constantly tending towards a complete union of monarchical institutions with the
largest amount of freedom, whether of associated action, of public discussion, or of
private conduct. In describing the religious contests of four centuries, I have striven
to show how, amidst all their evils, the spirit of Protestantism has been invariably
allied with the progress of liberal institutions and national independence; but, at the
same time, I have not forgotten that the principle of toleration is the one great good
that has been slowly working its way, as the passions and prejudices of Churches and
sects have yielded to the universal right of liberty of conscience.”* The
steady influence of that Public Opinion, which has prevented resistance becoming anarchy,
and obedience conducting to slavery, has
284 | PASSAGES OF A WORKING LIFE: | [Ch. XIII. |
grown from age to age with the material as well as the moral
development of our country. In forming the plan of my history, I set out upon the principle
that there was an inseparable connection between our political and our social history.
“When there is prosperous industry and fireside comfort, then, it may be
assumed, there is good government. When labour is oppressed and homes are wretched,
then, however powerful may be authority, and arms however triumphant, there is
‘something rotten in the State.’”*
In passing onward to the second great division of our country’s
history, I thus concluded the first half of my narrative. “In 1689, the
Constitution was established through the principle of Resistance, not upon any new
theories, but upon fundamental laws, many of which were of an older date than that of
the oldest oak which stood upon English ground. For this reason, it has never again
been necessary to call in the principle of Resistance. A time would come, when the
government of England, being so essentially a Parliamentary government, the struggles
of Parties would have more regard to the possession of power than to the interests of
the nation. But it was the essential consequence of these very strifes of Party, that,
whatever the influence of oligarchs or demagogues, a controlling public opinion was
constantly growing and strengthening.Ӡ
“The Popular History
of England” to the period of the Revolution embraced a class of subjects
that was once considered extraneous to history—the progress of manufactures and
commerce—the developments of literature and the arts—the aspects of
Ch. XIII.] | THE THIRD EPOCH. | 285 |
manners and of common life. The same principle was constantly kept
in view in the succeeding four volumes, which brought up the history to 1849—an epoch
marked by the final extinction of the Corn Laws. This large class of subjects, so
essentially connected with our civil, military, and religious annals, was treated by me,
“not in set dissertations under distinct heads, separated from the course of
events by long intervals, but in frequent notices, either in special chapters at
periods marked by characteristics of progress, or occurring as incidental illustrations
of the political narrative.” The experience of the present generation may be
sufficient to trace the connection between the progress of good government, following the
gradual discomfiture of corrupt or ignorant government, and the progress of industry, art,
and letters, maintaining and carrying forward the power and influence of political
improvement.
The proportions of those chapters of my Popular History of England which have reference to the
national Industry and the progress of the Arts, as compared with the chapters on our Civil,
Military, and Religious History, scarcely warrant me in accepting the title which has been
conferred upon me,—that of “The Boswell of
Birmingham.” It is a very pretty piece of alliteration, and has the true ring
of that small wit which goes a good way towards the making of a periodical critic of the
insolent order. In the four first volumes, which bring the history down to the Revolution,
one-tenth only of the whole matter is occupied with the subjects of Commerce and
Manufactures, of Science and Art, of Literature, of the Condition of the People. In the
second half of the work about one-fifth of the whole text is
286 | PASSAGES OF A WORKING LIFE: | [Ch. XIII. |
devoted
to these subjects. Of the eight volumes, comprising four thousand pages, an amount equal to
one volume is devoted to these various manifestations of the progress of a people. Such
details were once considered extraneous to history proper; and even now, some who think, or
affect to think, that history should confine itself to the concerns of Courts and Cabinets,
regard them as vulgar. Such, especially, is their opinion about Commerce and Manufactures.
Modern statesmanship has a different creed. It has been compelled to guide its course of
political action by a broad view of the social condition of the entire population, rather
than by the interests or prejudices of a party or a class. Never in our own country, and to
a certain extent in other countries, had the claims of industry—not upon patronage, not
upon protection, not upon bounties, but simply to be left free to work out its own
good—been more regarded in the highest places, as the one great foundation of national
prosperity. The slightest glance at the early history of England will show that with the
prosperity of industry, and that security of property, which was necessary for its more
general distribution, gradually came internal tranquillity, in spite of disputed
successions and constant attempts to put the neck of one class under the heel of another.
The “hostile armies” were, in every succeeding generation, becoming reduced in
numbers, and more and more open to the reconciliation of their conflicting pretensions. As
the mediaeval castles gradually became mansions; as the privileges of a caste were put
away, like “unscoured armour hung by the wall;” as there grew, out of feudal
exclusiveness, an aristocracy not alien to the commonalty; the yeoman, the merchant, Ch. XIII.] | THE THIRD EPOCH. | 287 |
the artisan, and last of all the peasant, came to be regarded as
integral portions of the state. Then, and not till then, was society secure in the
established reign of law and order. Then, and not till then, could those who did not labour
with their hands sit secure in their homes, even should an occasional demagogue attempt to
re-kindle the lights and fires of the fourteenth century to the tune of— “When Adam delved and
Eve span, Who was then the gentleman?” |
I might run over every era of our modern history to show how, with the
development of Industry and the accumulation of Wealth, those who have been seeking
“to diminish or destroy oppressive and tyrannous privileges and
customs” have been constrained to employ other weapons than physical force. There
was a time when “resistance was an ordinary remedy for political distempers—a
remedy which was always at hand, and which, though doubtless sharp at the moment,
produced no deep or lasting ill effects.” The historian marks the difference
of our own times; when “resistance must be regarded as a cure more desperate than
almost any malady that can afflict the state.” But there is something better
than the sword, if occasion should arise for uttering again the ancient demand for
“redress of grievances;” and Macaulay shows us the alternative: “As we cannot, without the risk
of evils from which the imagination recoils, employ physical force as a check on
misgovernment, it is evidently our wisdom to keep all the constitutional checks on
misgovernment in the highest state of efficiency; to watch
288 | PASSAGES OF A WORKING LIFE: | [Ch. XIII. |
with
jealousy the first beginnings of encroachment, and never to suffer irregularities, even
when harmless in themselves, to pass unchallenged.”* The old army of
resistance has become a Constabulary Force, equipped only with the staff that is the symbol
of Law and Order.
Here, strictly speaking, terminates the narrative of my labour and my
observation during half a century. This Chapter records the principal employment of my
time, to the end of 1862. I regard the chief part of that occupation, during seven years,
as having been to me a source of happiness. Removed, in a great degree, from commercial
labours and anxieties, that continuous direction of my mind to a subject so interesting and
engrossing as a General History of England, had a tranquillizing influence; and prepared me
to look back upon my past career with something like a philosophical estimate of its good
and evil fortune.
Until the Septuagenarian shall hear “kind Nature’s signal
to retreat.” Rest and Retrospection properly succeed the excitements of
“a Working Life.” The task of writing these “Passages” has been at
once Rest and Retrospection. It has involved no laborious research; it has compelled no
violent suppression of natural egotism to forbear speaking of personal matters that could
have no interest for others; it has demanded little more than an accurate memory of former
events, and a candid and charitable estimate of my contemporaries. Taken altogether, this
also has been a pleasurable task;
Ch. XIII.] | THE THIRD EPOCH. | 289 |
and, to compare small things with great, the “sober
melancholy” which Gibbon felt when he
wrote “the last lines of the last page” of his immortal History, comes
over me, as I contemplate taking a final leave “of an old and agreeable
companion.” Let me postpone this parting, for a little while, by adopting the
device of some of our earlier poets, to enable them to linger in the home of
“pleasant thought” before they quitted it for ever.
James Boswell (1740-1795)
Scottish man of letters, author of
The Life of Samuel Johnson
(1791).
Edmund Burke (1729-1797)
Irish politician and opposition leader in Parliament, author of
On the
Sublime and Beautiful (1757) and
Reflections on the Revolution
in France (1790).
John Philpot Curran (1750-1817)
Irish statesman and orator; as a Whig MP (from 1783) he defended the United Irishmen in
Parliament (1798).
Francis Egerton, first earl of Ellesmere (1800-1857)
Poet, statesman, and Tory MP; a younger son the second marquess of Stafford, he was
educated at Eton and Christ Church, Oxford, was chief secretary for Ireland (1828-30), and
translated Goethe and Schiller and contributed articles to the
Quarterly
Review.
Edward Gibbon (1737-1794)
Author of
The History of the Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire
(1776-1788).
Oliver Goldsmith (1728 c.-1774)
Irish miscellaneous writer; his works include
The Vicar of
Wakefield (1766),
The Deserted Village (1770), and
She Stoops to Conquer (1773).
Henry Hallam (1777-1859)
English historian and contributor to the
Edinburgh Review, author
of
Introduction to the Literature of Europe, 4 vols (1837-39) and
other works. He was the father of Tennyson's Arthur Hallam.
David Hume (1711-1776)
Scottish philosopher and historian; author of
Essays Moral and
Political (1741-42),
Enquiry concerning Human Understanding
(1748) and
History of Great Britain (1754-62).
King James VII and II (1633-1701)
Son of Charles I; he was king of England and Scotland 1685-88, forced from office during
the Glorious Revolution.
Samuel Johnson (1709-1784)
English man of letters, among many other works he edited
A Dictionary
of the English Language (1755) and Shakespeare (1765), and wrote
Lives of the Poets (1779-81).
Thomas Edward Kebbel (1826-1917)
Educated at Merchant Taylors' School and Lincoln College, Oxford, he was a Conservative
journalist, biographer, and historian who wrote for
Blackwood's and
the
Quarterly Review.
Charles Knight (1791-1873)
London publisher, originally of Windsor where he produced
The
Etonian; Dallas's
Recollections of Lord Byron was one of
his first ventures. He wrote
Passages of a Working Life during half a
Century, 3 vols (1864-65).
Edwin Lankester (1814-1874)
Educated at University of London, he was a physician, natural scientist, health reformer,
and friend of Charles Dickens and Douglas Jerrold.
Samuel Lucas (1818-1868)
Educated at Queen's College, Oxford, and the Inner Temple, he practiced law before
becoming a Tory journalist, reviewer for
The Times, author, and
editor of Thomas Hood (1867).
Vernon Lushington (1832-1912)
The son of Stephen Lushington (1782-1873); educated at Cheam School, Trinity College,
Cambridge, and the Inner Temple, he was a barrister and writer for periodicals who taught
at the Working Men's College.
Alexander Pope (1688-1744)
English poet and satirist; author of
The Rape of the Lock (1714)
and
The Dunciad (1728).
Alexander Ramsay (1794-1869)
Born in humble circumstances, he worked in a print shop and as a journalist before being
employed by Charles Knight as an editor. He published
Shakspere in
Germany (1866).
Archibald Hamilton Rowan (1751-1834)
Originally Hamilton; educated at Queen's College, Cambridge, he was a United Irishman who
after imprisonment and pardon spent his later years as a landowner and supporter of
Catholic Emancipation.
John Russell, first earl Russell (1792-1878)
English statesman, son of John Russell sixth duke of Bedford (1766-1839); he was author
of
Essay on the English Constitution (1821) and
Memoirs of the Affairs of Europe (1824) and was Prime Minister (1865-66).
Sir Richard Steele (1672-1729)
English playwright and essayist, who conducted
The Tatler, and
(with Joseph Addison)
The Spectator and
The
Guardian.
James Thorne (1815-1881)
Originally an artist, he was an antiquary and topographer who wrote for
The Mirror and
Penny Magazine and contributed to
The Land we Live in, 4 vols (1847-50).
Thomas Watts (1811-1869)
He was superintendent of the reading room at the British Museum (1857) and keeper of
printed books (1866); he contributed to the
Gentleman's Magazine and
the
Athenaeum.
John Wilkes (1725-1797)
English political reformer and foe of George III who was twice elected to Parliament
while imprisoned; he was the author of attacks on the Scots and the libertine
Essay on Woman.
The Quarterly Review. (1809-1967). Published by John Murray, the
Quarterly was instigated by Walter
Scott as a Tory rival to the
Edinburgh Review. It was edited by
William Gifford to 1824, and by John Gibson Lockhart from 1826 to 1853.
The Times. (1785-). Founded by John Walter, The Times was edited by Thomas Barnes from 1817 to 1841. In the
romantic era it published much less literary material than its rival dailies, the
Morning Chronicle and the
Morning
Post.