III.

Secondly, history is necessary to the man of conservative and

reverent nature, who looks back to the origins of his existence with

love and trust; through it, he gives thanks for life. He is careful

to preserve what survives from ancient days, and will reproduce the

conditions of his own upbringing for those who come after him; thus

he does life a service. The possession of his ancestors' furniture

changes its meaning in his soul: for his soul is rather possessed by

it. All that is small and limited, mouldy and obsolete, gains a worth

and inviolability of its own from the conservative and reverent soul

of the antiquary migrating into it, and building a secret nest there.

The history of his town becomes the history of himself; he looks on

the walls, the turreted gate, the town council, the fair, as an

illustrated diary of his youth, and sees himself in it all--his

strength, industry, desire, reason, faults and follies. "Here one

could live," he says, "as one can live here now--and will go on

living; for we are tough folk, and will not be uprooted in the

night." And so, with his "we," he surveys the marvellous individual

life of the past and identifies himself with the spirit of the house,

the family and the city. He greets the soul of his people from afar

as his own, across the dim and troubled centuries: his gifts and his

virtues lie in such power of feeling and divination, his scent of a

half-vanished trail, his instinctive correctness in reading the

scribbled past, and understanding at once its palimpsests--nay, its

polypsests. Goethe stood with such thoughts before the monument of

Erwin von Steinbach: the storm of his feeling rent the historical

cloud-veil that hung between them, and he saw the German work for the

first time "coming from the stern, rough, German soul." This was the

road that the Italians of the Renaissance travelled, the spirit that

reawakened the ancient Italic genius in their poets to "a wondrous

echo of the immemorial lyre," as Jacob Burckhardt says. But the

greatest value of this antiquarian spirit of reverence lies in the

simple emotions of pleasure and content that it lends to the drab,

rough, even painful circumstances of a nation's or individual's life:

Niebuhr confesses that he could live happily on a moor among free

peasants with a history, and would never feel the want of art. How

could history serve life better than by anchoring the less gifted

races and peoples to the homes and customs of their ancestors, and

keeping them from ranging far afield in search of better, to find

only struggle and competition? The influence that ties men down to

the same companions and circumstances, to the daily round of toil, to

their bare mountain-side,--seems to be selfish and unreasonable: but

it is a healthy unreason and of profit to the community; as every one

knows who has clearly realised the terrible consequences of mere

desire for migration and adventure,--perhaps in whole peoples,--or

who watches the destiny of a nation that has lost confidence in its

earlier days, and is given up to a restless cosmopolitanism and an

unceasing desire for novelty. The feeling of the tree that clings to

its roots, the happiness of knowing one's growth to be one not merely

arbitrary and fortuitous, but the inheritance, the fruit and blossom

of a past, that does not merely justify but crown the present--this

is what we nowadays prefer to call the real historical sense.

These are not the conditions most favourable to reducing the past to

pure science: and we see here too, as we saw in the case of

monumental history, that the past itself suffers when history serves

life and is directed by its end. To vary the metaphor, the tree feels

its roots better than it can see them: the greatness of the feeling

is measured by the greatness and strength of the visible branches.

The tree may be wrong here; how far more wrong will it be in regard

to the whole forest, which it only knows and feels so far as it is

hindered or helped by it, and not otherwise! The antiquarian sense of

a man, a city or a nation has always a very limited field. Many

things are not noticed at all; the others are seen in isolation, as

through a microscope. There is no measure: equal importance is given

to everything, and therefore too much to anything. For the things of

the past are never viewed in their true perspective or receive their

just value; but value and perspective change with the individual or

the nation that is looking back on its past.

There is always the danger here, that everything ancient will be

regarded as equally venerable, and everything without this respect

for antiquity, like a new spirit, rejected as an enemy. The Greeks

themselves admitted the archaic style of plastic art by the side of

the freer and greater style; and later, did not merely tolerate the

pointed nose and the cold mouth, but made them even a canon of taste.

If the judgment of a people harden in this way, and history's service

to the past life be to undermine a further and higher life; if the

historical sense no longer preserve life, but mummify it: then the

tree dies, unnaturally, from the top downwards, and at last the roots

themselves wither. Antiquarian history degenerates from the moment

that it no longer gives a soul and inspiration to the fresh life of

the present. The spring of piety is dried up, but the learned habit

persists without it and revolves complaisantly round its own centre.

The horrid spectacle is seen of the mad collector raking over all the

dust-heaps of the past. He breathes a mouldy air; the antiquarian

habit may degrade a considerable talent, a real spiritual need in

him, to a mere insatiable curiosity for everything old: he often

sinks so low as to be satisfied with any food, and greedily devour

all the scraps that fall from the bibliographical table.

Even if this degeneration do not take place, and the foundation be

not withered on which antiquarian history can alone take root with

profit to life: yet there are dangers enough, if it become too

powerful and invade the territories of the other methods. It only

understands how to preserve life, not to create it; and thus always

undervalues the present growth, having, unlike monumental history, no

certain instinct for it. Thus it hinders the mighty impulse to a new

deed and paralyses the doer, who must always, as doer, be grazing

some piety or other. The fact that has grown old carries with it a

demand for its own immortality. For when one considers the

life-history of such an ancient fact, the amount of reverence paid to

it for generations--whether it be a custom, a religious creed, or a

political principle,--it seems presumptuous, even impious, to replace

it by a new fact, and the ancient congregation of pieties by a new

piety.

Here we see clearly how necessary a third way of looking at the past

is to man, beside the other two. This is the "critical" way; which is

also in the service of life. Man must have the strength to break up

the past; and apply it too, in order to live. He must bring the past

to the bar of judgment, interrogate it remorselessly, and finally

condemn it. Every past is worth condemning: this is the rule in

mortal affairs, which always contain a large measure of human power

and human weakness. It is not justice that sits in judgment here; nor

mercy that proclaims the verdict; but only life, the dim, driving

force that insatiably desires--itself. Its sentence is always

unmerciful, always unjust, as it never flows from a pure fountain of

knowledge: though it would generally turn out the same, if Justice

herself delivered it. "For everything that is born is _worthy_ of

being destroyed: better were it then that nothing should be born." It

requires great strength to be able to live and forget how far life

and injustice are one. Luther himself once said that the world only

arose by an oversight of God; if he had ever dreamed of heavy

ordnance, he would never have created it. The same life that needs

forgetfulness, needs sometimes its destruction; for should the

injustice of something ever become obvious--a monopoly, a caste, a

dynasty for example--the thing deserves to fall. Its past is

critically examined, the knife put to its roots, and all the

"pieties" are grimly trodden under foot. The process is always

dangerous, even for life; and the men or the times that serve life in

this way, by judging and annihilating the past, are always dangerous

to themselves and others. For as we are merely the resultant of

previous generations, we are also the resultant of their errors,

passions, and crimes: it is impossible to shake off this chain.

Though we condemn the errors and think we have escaped them, we

cannot escape the fact that we spring from them. At best, it comes to

a conflict between our innate, inherited nature and our knowledge,

between a stern, new discipline and an ancient tradition; and we

plant a new way of life, a new instinct, a second nature, that

withers the first. It is an attempt to gain a past _a posteriori_

from which we might spring, as against that from which we do spring;

always a dangerous attempt, as it is difficult to find a limit to the

denial of the past, and the second natures are generally weaker than

the first. We stop too often at knowing the good without doing it,

because we also know the better but cannot do it. Here and there the

victory is won, which gives a strange consolation to the fighters, to

those who use critical history for the sake of life. The consolation

is the knowledge that this "first nature" was once a second, and that

every conquering "second nature" becomes a first.

Thoughts Out of Season, Part II · 第 23 / 39 题