We wish to add a few words relative to another subject on which the

enemies of Milton delight to dwell,--his conduct during the

administration of the Protector. That an enthusiastic votary of liberty

should accept office under a military usurper seems, no doubt, at first

sight, extraordinary. But all the circumstances in which the country was

then placed were extraordinary. The ambition of Oliver was of no vulgar

kind. He never seems to have coveted despotic power. He at first fought

sincerely and manfully for the Parliament, and never deserted it till

it had deserted its duty. If he dissolved it by force, it was not till

he found that the few members who remained after so many deaths,

secessions, and expulsions, were desirous to appropriate to themselves a

power which they held only in trust, and to inflict upon England the

curse of a Venetian oligarchy. But even when thus placed by violence at

the head of affairs, he did not assume unlimited power. He gave the

country a constitution far more perfect than any which had at that time

been known in the world. He reformed the representative system in a

manner which has extorted praise even from Lord Clarendon. For himself

he demanded indeed the first place in the commonwealth; but with powers

scarcely so great as those of a Dutch stadtholder, or an American

president. He gave the Parliament a voice in the appointment of

ministers, and left to it the whole legislative authority, not even

reserving to himself a veto on its enactments; and he did not require

that the chief magistracy should be hereditary in his family. Thus far,

we think, if the circumstances of the time and the opportunities which

he had of aggrandizing himself be fairly considered, he will not lose by

comparison with Washington or Bolivar. Had his moderation been met by

corresponding moderation, there is no reason to think that he would have

overstepped the line which he had traced for himself. But when he found

that his parliaments questioned the authority under which they met, and

that he was in danger of being deprived of the restricted power which

was absolutely necessary to his personal safety, then, it must be

acknowledged, he adopted a more arbitrary policy.

Yet, though we believe that the intentions of Cromwell were at first

honest, though we believe that he was driven from the noble course which

he had marked out for himself by the almost irresistible force of

circumstances, though we admire, in common with all men of all parties,

the ability and energy of his splendid administration, we are not

pleading for arbitrary and lawless power, even in his hands. We know

that a good constitution is infinitely better than the best despot. But

we suspect that, at the time of which we speak, the violence of

religious and political enmities rendered a stable and happy settlement

next to impossible. The choice lay, not between Cromwell and liberty,

but between Cromwell and the Stuarts. That Milton chose well, no man can

doubt who fairly compares the events of the protectorate with those of

the thirty years which succeeded it, the darkest and most disgraceful in

the English annals. Cromwell was evidently laying, though in an

irregular manner, the foundations of an admirable system. Never before

had religious liberty and the freedom of discussion been enjoyed in a

greater degree. Never had the national honor been better upheld abroad,

or the seat of justice better filled at home. And it was rarely that any

opposition which stopped short of open rebellion provoked the resentment

of the liberal and magnanimous usurper. The institutions which he had

established, as set down in the Instrument of Government, and the Humble

Petition and Advice, were excellent. His practice, it is true, too often

departed from the theory of these institutions. But had he lived a few

years longer, it is probable that his institutions would have survived

him, and that his arbitrary practice would have died with him. His power

had not been consecrated by ancient prejudices. It was upheld only by

his great personal qualities. Little, therefore, was to be dreaded from

a second protector, unless he were also a second Oliver Cromwell. The

events which followed his decease are the most complete vindication of

those who exerted themselves to uphold his authority. His death

dissolved the whole frame of society. The army rose against the

Parliament, the different corps of the army against each other. Sect

raved against sect. Party plotted against party. The Presbyterians, in

their eagerness to be revenged on the Independents, sacrificed their own

liberty, and deserted all their old principles. Without casting one

glance on the past, or requiring one stipulation for the future, they

threw down their freedom at the feet of the most frivolous and heartless

of tyrants.

Then came those days, never to be recalled without a blush, the days of

servitude without loyalty and sensuality without love, of dwarfish

talents and gigantic vices, the paradise of cold hearts and narrow

minds, the golden age of the coward, the bigot, and the slave. The King

cringed to his rival that he might trample on his people, sank into a

viceroy of France, and pocketed, with complacent infamy, her degrading

insults and her more degrading gold. The caresses of harlots and the

jests of buffoons regulated the policy of the State. The government had

just ability enough to deceive, and just religion enough to persecute.

The principles of liberty were the scoff of every grinning courtier, and

the Anathema Maranatha of every fawning dean. In every high place,

worship was paid to Charles and James, Belial and Moloch; and England

propitiated those obscene and cruel idols with the blood of her best and

bravest children. Crime succeeded to crime, and disgrace to disgrace,

till the race accursed of God and man was a second time driven forth, to

wander on the face of the earth, and to be a by-word and a shaking of

the head to the nations.

Most of the remarks which we have hitherto made on the public character

of Milton apply to him only as one of a large body. We shall proceed to

notice some of the peculiarities which distinguished him from his

contemporaries. And, for that purpose, it is necessary to take a short

survey of the parties into which the political world was at that time

divided. We must premise that our observations are intended to apply

only to those who adhered, from a sincere preference, to one or to the

other side. In days of public commotion, every faction, like an Oriental

army, is attended by a crowd of camp-followers, a useless and heartless

rabble, who prowl round its line of march in the hope of picking up

something under its protection, but desert it in the day of battle, and

often join to exterminate it after a defeat. England, at the time of

which we are treating, abounded with fickle and selfish politicians, who

transferred their support to every government as it rose; who kissed the

hand of the king in 1640, and spat in his face in 1649; who shouted with

equal glee when Cromwell was inaugurated at Westminster Hall and when he

was dug up to be hanged at Tyburn; who dined on calves' heads, or stuck

up oak-branches, as circumstances altered, without the slightest shame

or repugnance. These we leave out of the account. We take our estimate

of parties from those who really deserve to be called partisans.

We would speak first of the Puritans, the most remarkable body of men,

perhaps, which the world has ever produced. The odious and ridiculous

parts of their character lie on the surface. He that runs may read them;

nor have there been wanting attentive and malicious observers to point

them out. For many years after the Restoration they were the theme of

unmeasured invective and derision. They were exposed to the utmost

licentiousness of the press and of the stage, at the time when the press

and the stage were most licentious. They were not men of letters; they

were, as a body, unpopular; they could not defend themselves; and the

public would not take them under its protection. They were therefore

abandoned, without reserve, to the tender mercies of the satirists and

dramatists. The ostentatious simplicity of their dress, their sour

aspect, their nasal twang, their stiff posture, their long graces, their

Hebrew names, the Scriptural phrases which they introduced on every

occasion, their contempt of human learning, their detestation of polite

amusements, were indeed fair game for the laughers. But it is not from

the laughers alone that the philosophy of history is to be learned. And

he who approaches this subject should carefully guard against the

influence of that potent ridicule which has already misled so many

excellent writers.

"Ecco il fonte del riso, ed ecco il rio

Che mortali perigli in se contiene:

Hor qui tener a fren nostro desio,

Ed esser cauti molto a noi conviene."

Those who roused the people to resistance; who directed their measures

through a long series of eventful years; who formed, out of the most

unpromising materials, the finest army that Europe had ever seen; who

trampled down King, Church, and Aristocracy; who, in the short intervals

of domestic sedition and rebellion, made the name of England terrible to

every nation on the face of the earth--were no vulgar fanatics. Most of

their absurdities were mere external badges, like the signs of

freemasonry or the dresses of friars. We regret that these badges were

not more attractive. We regret that a body to whose courage and talents

mankind has owed inestimable obligations had not the lofty elegance

which distinguished some of the adherents of Charles the First, or the

easy good-breeding for which the court of Charles the Second was

celebrated. But, if we must make our choice, we shall, like Bassanio in

the play, turn from the specious caskets which contain only the Death's

head and the Fool's head, and fix on the plain leaden chest which

conceals the treasure.

The Puritans were men whose minds had derived a peculiar character from

the daily contemplation of superior beings and eternal interests. Not

content with acknowledging, in general terms, an overruling Providence,

they habitually ascribed every event to the will of the Great Being for

whose power nothing was too vast, for whose inspection nothing was too

minute. To know him, to serve him, to enjoy him, was with them the

great end of existence. They rejected with contempt the ceremonious

homage which other sects substituted for the pure worship of the soul.

Instead of catching occasional glimpses of the Deity through an

obscuring veil, they aspired to gaze full on his intolerable brightness,

and to commune with him face to face. Hence originated their contempt

for terrestrial distinctions. The difference between the greatest and

the meanest of mankind seemed to vanish when compared with the boundless

interval which separated the whole race from him on whom their own eyes

were constantly fixed. They recognized no title to superiority but his

favor; and, confident of that favor, they despised all the

accomplishments and all the dignities of the world. If they were

unacquainted with the works of philosophers and poets, they were deeply

read in the oracles of God. If their names were not found in the

registers of heralds, they were recorded in the Book of Life. If their

steps were not accompanied by a splendid train of menials, legions of

ministering angels had charge over them. Their palaces were houses not

made with hands; their diadems crowns of glory which should never fade

away. On the rich and the eloquent, on nobles and priests, they looked

down with contempt; for they esteemed themselves rich in a more precious

treasure, and eloquent in a more sublime language, nobles by the right

of an earlier creation, and priests by the imposition of a mightier

hand. The very meanest of them was a being to whose fate a mysterious

and terrible importance belonged; on whose slightest action the spirits

of light and darkness looked with anxious interest; who had been

destined, before heaven and earth were created, to enjoy a felicity

which should continue when heaven and earth should have passed away.

Events which short-sighted politicians ascribed to earthly causes had

been ordained on his account. For his sake empires had risen, and

flourished, and decayed. For his sake the Almighty had proclaimed his

will by the pen of the evangelist and the harp of the prophet. He had

been wrested by no common deliverer from the grasp of no common foe. He

had been ransomed by the sweat of no vulgar agony by the blood of no

earthly sacrifice. It was for him that the sun had been darkened, that

the rocks had been rent, that the dead had risen, that all nature had

shuddered at the sufferings of her expiring God.

Thus the Puritan was made up of two different men, the one all

self-abasement, penitence, gratitude, passion, the other proud, calm,

inflexible, sagacious. He prostrated himself in the dust before his

Maker; but he set his foot on the neck of his king. In his devotional

retirement, he prayed with convulsions, and groans, and tears. He was

half maddened by glorious or terrible illusions. He heard the lyres of

angels or the tempting whispers of fiends. He caught a gleam of the

Beatific Vision, or woke screaming from dreams of everlasting fire. Like

Vane, he thought himself intrusted with the sceptre of the millennial

year. Like Fleetwood, he cried in the bitterness of his soul that God

had hid his face from him. But when he took his seat in the council, or

girt on his sword for war, these tempestuous workings of the soul had

left no perceptible trace behind them. People who saw nothing of the

godly but their uncouth visages, and heard nothing from them but their

groans and their whining hymns, might laugh at them. But those had

little reason to laugh who encountered them in the hall of debate or on

the field of battle. These fanatics brought to civil and military

affairs a coolness of judgment and an immutability of purpose which some

writers have thought inconsistent with their religious zeal, but which

were in fact the necessary effects of it. The intensity of their

feelings on one subject made them tranquil on every other. One

overpowering sentiment had subjected to itself pity and hatred, ambition

and fear. Death had lost its terrors and pleasure its charms. They had

their smiles and their tears, their raptures and their sorrows, but not

for the things of this world. Enthusiasm had made them stoics, had

cleared their minds from every vulgar passion and prejudice, and raised

them above the influence of danger and of corruption. It sometimes might

lead them to pursue unwise ends, but never to choose unwise means. They

went through the world, like Sir Artegal's iron man Talus with his

flail, crushing and trampling down oppressors, mingling with human

beings, but having neither part nor lot in human infirmities; insensible

to fatigue, to pleasure, and to pain; not to be pierced by any weapon,

not to be withstood by any barrier.

Such we believe to have been the character of the Puritans. We perceive

the absurdity of their manners. We dislike the sullen gloom of their

domestic habits. We acknowledge that the tone of their minds was often

injured by straining after things too high for mortal reach; and we know

that, in spite of their hatred of popery, they too often fell into the

worst vices of that bad system, intolerance and extravagant austerity,

that they had their anchorites and their crusades, their Dunstans and

their De Montforts, their Dominics and their Escobars. Yet, when all

circumstances are taken into consideration, we do not hesitate to

pronounce them a brave, a wise, an honest, and a useful body.

The Puritans espoused the cause of civil liberty mainly because it was

the cause of religion. There was another party, by no means numerous,

but distinguished by learning and ability, which acted with them on very

different principles. We speak of those whom Cromwell was accustomed to

call the Heathens, men who were, in the phraseology of that time,

doubting Thomases or careless Gallios with regard to religious

subjects, but passionate worshippers of freedom. Heated by the study of

ancient literature, they set up their country as their idol, and

proposed to themselves the heroes of Plutarch as their examples. They

seem to have borne some resemblance to the Brissotines of the French

Revolution. But it is not very easy to draw the line of distinction

between them and their devout associates, whose tone and manner they

sometimes found it convenient to affect, and sometimes, it is probable,

imperceptibly adopted.

We now come to the Royalists. We shall attempt to speak of them, as we

have spoken of their antagonists, with perfect candor. We shall not

charge upon a whole party the profligacy and baseness of the horse-boys,

gamblers, and bravoes, whom the hope of license and plunder attracted

from the dens of Whitefriars to the standard of Charles, and who

disgraced their associates by excesses which, under the stricter

discipline of the Parliamentary armies, were never tolerated. We will

select a more favorable specimen. Thinking as we do that the cause of

the king was the cause of bigotry and tyranny, we yet cannot refrain

from looking with complacency on the character of the honest old

Cavaliers. We feel a national pride in comparing them with the

instruments which the despots of other countries are compelled to

employ, with the mutes who throng their antechambers, and the

Janizaries who mount guard at their gates. Our Royalist countrymen were

not heartless, dangling courtiers, bowing at every step, and simpering

at every word. They were not mere machines for destruction, dressed up

in uniforms, caned into skill, intoxicated into valor, defending without

love, destroying without hatred. There was a freedom in their

subserviency, a nobleness in their very degradation. The sentiment of

individual independence was strong within them. They were indeed misled,

but by no base or selfish motive. Compassion and romantic honor, the

prejudices of childhood, and the venerable names of history, threw over

them a spell potent as that of Duessa; and, like the Red Cross Knight,

they thought that they were doing battle for an injured beauty, while

they defended a false and loathsome sorceress. In truth, they scarcely

entered at all into the merits of the political question. It was not for

a treacherous king or an intolerant church that they fought, but for the

old banner which had waved in so many battles over the heads of their

fathers, and for the altars at which they had received the hands of

their brides. Though nothing could be more erroneous than their

political opinions, they possessed, in a far greater degree than their

adversaries, those qualities which are the grace of private life. With

many of the vices of the Round Table, they had also many of its virtues,

courtesy, generosity, veracity, tenderness, and respect for women. They

had far more both of profound and of polite learning than the Puritans.

Their manners were more engaging, their tempers more amiable, their

tastes more elegant, and their households more cheerful.

Milton did not strictly belong to any of the classes which we have

described. He was not a Puritan. He was not a freethinker. He was not a

Royalist. In his character the noblest qualities of every party were

combined in harmonious union. From the Parliament and from the court,

from the conventicle and from the Gothic cloister, from the gloomy and

sepulchral circles of the Roundheads, and from the Christmas revel of

the hospitable Cavalier, his nature selected and drew to itself whatever

was great and good, while it rejected all the base and pernicious

ingredients by which those finer elements were defiled. Like the

Puritans, he lived

"As ever in his great taskmaster's eye."

Like them, he kept his mind continually fixed on the Almighty Judge and

an eternal reward. And hence he acquired their contempt of external

circumstances, their fortitude, their tranquillity, their inflexible

resolution. But not the coolest sceptic or the most profane scoffer was

more perfectly free from the contagion of their frantic delusions, their

savage manners, their ludicrous jargon, their scorn of science, and

their aversion to pleasure. Hating tyranny with a perfect hatred, he had

nevertheless all the estimable and ornamental qualities which were

almost entirely monopolized by the party of the tyrant. There was none

who had a stronger sense of the value of literature, a finer relish for

every elegant amusement, or a more chivalrous delicacy of honor and

love. Though his opinions were democratic, his tastes and his

associations were such as best harmonize with monarchy and aristocracy.

He was under the influence of all the feelings by which the gallant

Cavaliers were misled. But of those feelings he was the master, and not

the slave. Like the hero of Homer, he enjoyed all the pleasures of

fascination; but he was not fascinated. He listened to the song of the

Sirens; yet he glided by without being seduced to their fatal shore. He

tasted the cup of Circe; but he bore about him a sure antidote against

the effects of its bewitching sweetness. The illusions which captivated

his imagination never impaired his reasoning powers. The statesman was

proof against the splendor, the solemnity, and the romance which

enchanted the poet. Any person who will contrast the sentiments

expressed in his treatises on Prelacy with the exquisite lines on

ecclesiastical architecture and music in the Penseroso, which was

published about the same time, will understand our meaning. This is an

inconsistency which, more than anything else, raises his character in

our estimation, because it shows how many private tastes and feelings he

sacrificed, in order to do what he considered his duty to mankind. It is

the very struggle of the noble Othello. His heart relents; but his hand

is firm. He does naught in hate, but all in honor. He kisses the

beautiful deceiver before he destroys her.

That from which the public character of Milton derives its great and

peculiar splendor still remains to be mentioned. If he exerted himself

to overthrow a forsworn king and a persecuting hierarchy, he exerted

himself in conjunction with others. But the glory of the battle which he

fought for the species of freedom which is the most valuable, and which

was then the least understood, the freedom of the human mind, is all his

own. Thousands and tens of thousands among his contemporaries raised

their voices against ship-money and the Star-chamber. But there were few

indeed who discerned the more fearful evils of moral and intellectual

slavery, and the benefits which would result from liberty of the press

and the unfettered exercise of private judgment. These were the objects

which Milton justly conceived to be the most important. He was desirous

that the people should think for themselves as well as tax themselves,

and should be emancipated from the dominion of prejudice as well as from

that of Charles. He knew that those who, with the best intentions,

overlooked these schemes of reform, and contented themselves with

pulling down the King and imprisoning the malignants, acted like the

heedless brothers in his own poem, who, in their eagerness to disperse

the train of the sorcerer, neglected the means of liberating the

captive. They thought only of conquering when they should have thought

of disenchanting.

"Oh, ye mistook! Ye should have snatched his wand

And bound him fast. Without the rod reversed,

And backward mutters of dissevering power,

We cannot free the lady that sits here

Bound in strong fetters fixed and motionless."

Beacon Lights of History, Volume 13: Great Writers Dr Lord's Uncompleted Plan, Supplemented with Essays by Emerson, Macaulay, Hedge, and Mercer Adam · 第 19 / 25 段