The modest critick, or, Remarks upon the most eminent historians, antient and modern with useful cautions and instructions as well for writing as reading history : wherein the sense of the greatest men on this subject is faithfully abridged / by one of the Society of the Port-Royal.

XXVIII. Judgment of Historians.

Herodotus is the first who has given a reasonable form to Histo∣ry; and his merit is, to have led the way to others. His Style is pure and eloquent. Athenaeus praises him for the Charms of his Discourse. His Subject is great and vast; for it compasses Nati∣ons, Kingdoms, Empires; the Affairs of Europe and Asia. He is not very exact in what he says, because he contains too much matter; but I find in him a sincerity which is not very common, because he uses Greeks and Barbarians, his own Coun∣treymen and Strangers, without any shew of Partiality. I find Plutarch deals with him too ri∣gorously, when he makes him to have an ill meaning in most part of his Conjectures; but it is only Envy and Revenge makes him use him so, because he u∣sed ill his Countrey of Boeotia, in

his History. Thucydides is ex∣act in his way of writing, faith∣ful in things he relates, sincere, and not sway'd by Interest: he has Greatness, Nobleness, Maje∣sty in his Style; he is always strict, but his strictness has no∣thing but what is great in it: The Truth is, that his Subject is lesser, and more limited than that of Herodotus. It is only through a Spirit of Partiality, that Dionysius Halicarnassaeus pre∣fers Herodotus before Thucydides, the first being his Countreyman: For my own part, I find him the most accomplish'd Historian a∣mong the Greeks. Xenophon is pure in his Language, Natural, agreeable in his Composition; his Mind is easie, rich, full of a deep knowledge, a clear imagination, a just turn; but he is neither great nor elevated. Good Man∣ners are not always well ob∣serv'd in his History, where he makes ignorant and brutish Peo∣ple speak like Philosophers. Ci∣cero tells us, that Scipio could not

part with him, when once he had him in his hands: Longinus gives it as his Character, That he conceiv'd things happily. Af∣ter all is done, he is a well-ac∣complished Historian; and it was by the reading of his History, that Scipio and Lucullus became so great Captains. Polybius discour∣ses well; he is provided with good and fine Materials, but he does not manage them so well as the others I spoke of but now: He ought, for all that, to be prais'd for the I∣dea Brutus had of him, who at the height of his Misfortunes, did pass whole Nights in the reading and studying of them. His De∣sign is not so much to write an History, as an Instruction how to govern a Countrey, as he him∣self says at the end of his First Book; and he leaves there, in a manner, the Character of an Hi∣storian, which obliges him to make a kind of an Apology in the be∣ginning of the Ninth Book, about his way of writing History: his Style is much neglected. Dionysi∣us

Halycarnassaeus shews, in his Book of Roman Antiquities, a deep Sense, Learning and Conduct, which is not common; he is exact, dili∣gent and judicious, truer than Li∣vy, and of great weight: But, to conclude, he is very tedious in his Speeches. Diodorus Siculus is a man of great Character; but he con∣tains too many things, pretending to make an Abridgement of Phili∣stus, of Timaeus, of Callisthenes, of Theopompus, and others. Philo and Josephus are Authors of an extra∣ordinary Eloquence: They were both Jews, who had too great a desire to please Pagans, by accom∣modating themselves like Slaves to their Humour and Taste. Arrian does but Copy Xenophon, and is an affected Imitator of his ways: he has made Seven Books of the Conquests of Alexander, as Xenophon did of Cyrus's: Appianus dabbl'd in all the Greek Historians, and with that hodge-podge has made to himself a Style which resembles no bodies. Scaliger calls him the Thief of Histories; he

took the best of his Book out of Plutarch's: but, after all, there is in him a vast deal of matter. Dio Cassius crack'd his Credit with almost every body, because of the extraordinary things which he writes without any distincti∣on: for instead of cleaving strict∣ly to the Truth, he runs from the very appearance of it, in that place of the 66th Book of his Hi∣story, where he says, That Vespasi∣an cur'd a blind man by spitting upon his Eyes. Procopius is ex∣act in what he says, because he accompanied Bellisarius in the Wars, and was an Eye-witness of his great Actions: but he is too dry in his History of Persia, which looks more like a Journal than History. He satisfied his own Fancy by writing that private Hi∣story; but his Modesty was great in his suppressing it: for the thing which he took pains to hide du∣ring his Life, was made publick after his Death; wherein he is not altogether inexcusable. Most part of those who have written the Hi∣stary

of Byzantium, either took Copies one by another, as Agathi∣as, Cedrenus, John Curopalatus; or are not very exact; and they come nothing near the Dignity, the Nobleness, the Distinguishing, and the Faithfulness of the An∣cient Greeks. Amongst the La∣tins, Salust looks great, exact, of an admirable Judgment. No bo∣dy ever express'd the sensible, ex∣act, severe Style of Thucydides, better than he. † He is stiff some∣times in his Expressions, but not insipid: his being so short, makes him less clear: His Method is good, and he gives weight to eve∣ry thing he says: His Thoughts are always fine, thô his Manners be bad; declaring always in Com∣mendation of Virtue, and Dete∣station of Vice. I find him a little too peevish with his Countrey, and ill affected to his Neighbour; but, for all that, he is a very great man. Caesar had the finest way of expressing himself that ever was. Pedants are in the right in admi∣ring him, for the inimitable pu∣rity

of his Style; but I still ad∣mire him the more, for the ex∣actness of his Sense, no body ha∣ving ever written better. He is almost the only Author that is free from Impertinencies. He speaks of himself but as an indif∣ferent body, and nothing disagrees in the wise Character he has ta∣ken. It is true, that he is not al∣together an Historian, but it is true too, that he is a fine Model to write History by. It is a great Honour for that incomparable Author, that Henry the Fourth of France, and Lewis the Fourteenth have busied themselves in the translating of his History of the Gaules. Livy is the most accom∣plish'd of all, because he has all the great Parts of an Historian; the Imagination fine, the Expres∣sion noble, an exact Sense, with an admirable Eloquence. None but great Idea's come in his Mind; he fills the Imagination of his Readers with what he says: that way he gains People's Hearts, and moves their Souls;

and he has the greatest Genius for History, and is one of the greatest Masters of Eloquence that ever was. I do not apprehend Asinius Pollia's meaning, who at∣tributes him a Countrey Air, which smells of Lombardy. His great strength is, to make Peo∣ple taste what he says, by draw∣ing his Readers to his own Sen∣timents, by infusing into their Minds his Fears and his Hopes, giving them all his Passion by the Art he has of moving the most hidden Springs of Hearts. Tacitus describes things in a way quite dif∣ferent from others; but he sticks too close to great things, to avoid falling into small ones, which ought not to be neglected. His thoughts are good, but he is not always happy enough to express himself neatly. He is too much a Philosopher. He speaks high∣ly of every thing: If means Desti∣ny was in his hands, he could not speak otherwise: and he morali∣zes always upon other People's foo∣lishness: and that he may spare no

body, he detracts from all Man∣kind. How many Spirits has he spoil'd by the desire of studying Politicks, which he inspir'd so ma∣ny People with, and which is the vainest of all Studies: 'Tis that ruin'd so many Spaniards, as Anto∣nio Perez, and so many Italians, as Machiavel, Ammirato, and others. It is only by the fineness of his Style, that this last pleases so much those of strong minds, and so lit∣tle those that are not so; for he gives distasts by the subtilty of his Discourses and Reflections. He is so obscure in his Expressions, that a man must be extreamly vers'd in his Style, to know how to unwrap his Thoughts. His manner of Criticising is fine of it self; but his constant censuring of all things makes it become course. He is elevated, because his thoughts are always high mounted: It is only that way that he imposes; and it is not so much to please, and to instruct, that he writes, as to make himself be admir'd: he has some∣thing extraordinary, which causes

People to excuse most part of his failings. But there are so many things to be said of that Author, good and bad, that there is no end in speaking of him. It is a kind of Wit, which is of use on∣ly for a shew; that does not fit the ordinary Commerce of men. Quin∣tus Curtius deserves praises for his being sincere: he says what is good and bad in Alexander, and never suffers the Merits of his He∣roes to prevent him. If there be any thing to be found fault with in his History, it is, that it is too nicely finish't. But for all that, he did ex∣cell in the Descriptions of Manners, which he has done with an Air a∣greeable and natural. That Cha∣racter of Perfections which is found in those great Men, was lost in the following Ages. Justin, who be∣came a Compiler, thinking to e∣rect himself to an Historian, does only touch things as he passes by. He knows a great deal; he says things sensibly; and he collected many Actions, which otherwise might have been lost. Most part

of the Authors; Historiae Augustae, fix'd their Minds to write Lives; as Plutarch and Herodian amongst the Greeks, Suetonius and Cornelius Nepos among the Latins; and so lost the Character of Historians. There came nothing after that, but single Chroniclers, Copiers, Compilers, and such whose Names were known by a course knowledge they gave of their Ages, to whom the Planet of History was not very favourable, ha∣ving nothing fine nor reasonable in them. There was but little Truth found in the Modern Greeks, who became Visionaries, and related ex∣traordinary Adventures, to please their own Fancies. The Love of Study, which flourish'd again in the late Ages, reviv'd again a number of good and sensible Historians, who by studying Ancient Authors, and ruling themselves by them, gain'd more Reputation than their Prede∣cessors Among those that excell'd then, that which is peculiar to Com∣mines, is, that he wrote with good sense and sincerity. Paulus Aemili∣us speaks purely, but is superficial:

Paulus Jovius follows only his Passi∣on and his Interest: Machiavel is ex∣act enough in his History of Florence; his Wit carries it above his Judg∣ment in the rest. He does not do Justice entirely to Castruccio Castrucci, whom he treats as an Enemy of his Countrey. Mariana, in his History of Spain, was out-done by no Mo∣dern, neither for the Greatness of the Design, nor for the Nobleness of the Style. Buchanan is a little too much like a Slave in his imita∣ting of Livy. He stole from the Ancients what he has that is good. He writes very sensibly, yet has not his thoughts elevated. His long Quotations in the Third Book, do not please every body, no more than the large account he gives in the Second Book of the Notion of the Countrey he speaks of. The Germans have vast Projects about their Histories, and nothing reduc'd into the Natural Order, which an exact Design requires. One may find in most part of the Spaniards a Spirit of Partiality for their Coun∣trey, which renders them much sus∣pected.

The Italians are rich in particular Histories of the several States which compose Italy; but they have no compleat Body of Hi∣story. There begins to appear a∣mongst us some beams of hopes to have some accomplished Historian, by the approbation the Publick gives to those that write now.

Notes

• Dulcis, can∣didus, fusus Herodotus. Fab. l. 10. c. 1. A∣then. 1. 3.
• Platarch. de malign. Herod.
• Laudatur ab omnibus ut re∣rum explica∣tor sincerus & gravis; hujus nemo neque verborum, ne∣que sententia∣rum gravita∣tem imitatur. Cic. de opt. Orar.
• Subtilissimus brevitatis arti∣fex Salustius, proprietatum in verbis reti∣nentissimus. Gell.
• †

  Salustius ho∣mo nequam, sed gravissimus alienae •…•…uxu∣riae objurgator. Lact. l. 2. de fals. Rel.
• In Tito Livio putat inesse Pollio quan∣dam Patavini∣tatem. Fab. l. 8. c. 1.
• Evenit non∣nunquam & a∣liquid granda inveniat, qui semper quaerit quod nimium est. Fab. l. 2. c. 13.