condemns the practice of assigning actions to bad motives on doubtful or obscure evidence, citing some examples.

The censorious habits of Theopompus are remarked upon by the ancients, as diminishing the value of his unfavourable testimony.-See Plutarch, Lysand. 30; Fragm. Hist. Gr. vol. i. p. lxxv.; and concerning Timæus, ib. p. lv.

NOTE C.-(p. 292.)

FRERET (Réflexions sur les Prodiges rapportés dans les Anciens) divides the prodigies of the ancients into two classes; viz. those which were violations of the order of nature, and those which were natural but rare phenomena. Les prodiges de la seconde classe sont des effets purement naturels, mais qui, arrivant moins fréquemment et paroissant contraires au cours ordinaire de la nature, ont été attribués à une cause surnaturelle par la superstition des hommes effrayés à la vue de ces objets inconnus.' -Euvres Completes, tom. i. p. 160.

When a strong belief in the probability of supernatural events exists, and men's minds are disturbed by panic fears, or excited by great expectations, contemporary registration is no security against the introduction of fabulous portents into history. The Roman prodigies appear to have been more carefully noted down in the annals of the year than any other class of events; such events as the speaking of cattle and sheep rest upon contemporary testimony, vouched by public authority. See, for example, the following passages of Livy - Romæ aut circa urbem multa eâ hieme prodigia facta: aut (quod evenire solet, motis semel in religionem animis) multa nunciata et temere credita sunt.'-xxi. 62.

Prodigia eo anno [u.c. 538] multa nunciatasunt; quæ, quo magis credebant simplices ac religiosi homines, eo plura nunciabantur.-Ib. xxiv. 10.

6

Etalia ludibria oculorum auriumque credita pro veris: navium longarum species in flumine Tarracinæ, quæ nullæ erant, visa; et in Jovis Vicilini templo, quod in Compsano agro est, arma concrepuisse,' &c.—Ib. xxiv. 44. In later times, as we learn from Livy, prodigies were no longer thought worthy of public attention: Non sum nescius, ab eâdem negligentiâ quá nihil Deos portendere vulgo nunc credant, neque nunciari admodum ulla prodigia in publicum, neque in annales referri. Ceterum et mihi vetustas res scribenti, nescio quo pacto antiquus fit animus; et quædam religio tenet, quæ illi prudentissimi viri publice suscipienda censuerint, ea pro dignis haberi quæ in meos annales referam.'-xliii. 13. Livy thus marks the cessation of the practice of registering prodigies in his own time, though he disapproves of the scepticism of his contemporaries, which rejects the belief in portents; and from his expression in xxvii. 11 (B.c. 209), 'satis constabat bovem locutum,' it would seem that the canon of belief with respect to an order of nature among educated Romans was not very fixed. So Virg. (Georg. i. 478), 'pecudesque locutæ, infandum.' Compare Lucan, i. 522-672.

The marvels of the early centuries were re-introduced into history in the sixth century (Eichhorn, Gesch. der Litt. vol. i. part ii. p. 833); and the medieval legends of saints and martyrs, which were written at, or soon after, the times to which they relate, teem with every variety of marvel. The resurrection of Montezuma's sister four days after her burial was believed in by Spanish writers; and legal attestations of the truth of this event were furnished to the court of Rome. See Prescott's Hist. of the Conquest of Mexico, vol. i. p. 285. Other catholic miracles are also attested by the contemporary historians of the conquests of Mexico and Peru. On prodigies and marvels in history, see Machiavel (Disc. i. 56); Griffet (Traité des Preuves qui servent à établir la Verité de l'Histoire, c. ii.)

The credulity of the Orientals, with respect to the contemporary occurrence of prodigies, is remarked by Volney-Ce penchant à l'admiration, cette facilité de croire aux faits et aux récits les plus extraordinaires, est un attribut remarquable de l'esprit des Orientaux. Ils admettent sans répugner, sans douter, tout ce que l'on veut leur conter de plus surprenant. A les entendre, il se passe encore aujourd'hui dans le monde autant de prodiges qu'au temps des génies et des afrites; la raison en est que, ne connaissant point le cours ordinaire des faits moraux et physiques, ils ne savent où assigner les bornes du probable et de l'impossible.'-Voyage en Egypte et en Syrie, tom. ii. p. 321.

NOTE D.-(p. 287.)

THE following observations upon discrepancies of historical evidence are made by Paley :- I know not a more rash or unphilosophical conduct of the understanding than to reject the substance of a story, by reason of some diversity in the circumstances with which it is related. The usual character of human testimony is substantial truth under circumstantial variety. This is what the daily experience of courts of justice teaches. When accounts of a transaction come from the mouths of different witnesses, it is seldom that it is not possible to pick out apparent or real inconsistencies between them. These inconsistencies are studiously displayed by an adverse pleader, but oftentimes with little impression upon the minds of the judges. On the contrary, a close and minute agreement induces the suspicion of confederacy and fraud. When written histories touch upon the same scenes of action, the comparison almost always affords ground for a like reflection. Numerous, and sometimes important, variations present themselves; not seldom, also, absolute and final contradictions; yet neither one nor the other are deemed sufficient to shake the credibility of the main fact. The embassy of the Jews to deprecate the execution of Claudian's order to place his statue in their temple, Philo places in harvest; Josephus in seed-time-both contemporary writers. No reader is led by this inconsistency to doubt whether such an embassy was sent, or whether such an order was given. Our own history supplies examples of the same kind. In the account of the Marquis of Argyle's death, in the reign of Charles II., we have a very remarkable contradiction. Lord Clarendon relates that he was condemned to be hanged, which was performed the same day; on the contrary, Burnet, Woodrow, Heath, Echard, concur in stating that he was beheaded; and that he was condemned upon the Saturday, and executed upon the Monday. Was any reader of English history ever sceptic enough to raise from hence a question, whether the Marquis of Argyle was executed or not ?'-Evid. of Christ. part iii. ch. i.

The applicability and extent of the canon of evidence here laid down by Paley will receive some light from an examination of the historical examples which he adduces. In the first of these, by the execution of Claudian's order,' he appears to mean the order of the Emperor Claudius. The order referred to is described by Josephus, Ant. xviii. 8; Bell. Jud. ii. 10; and by Philo, Legat. ad Calum, c. 31, sq. It was, however, issued, not by Claudius, but by his predecessor Caligula, and its execution was prevented by the accession of Claudius. No embassy was sent from Judæa to Caligula concerning this order; but only a despatch from Petronius, the governor. The narratives of the transaction by Josephus and Philo differ, indeed, as Dr. Milman has remarked (Hist. of Jews, b. xii. vol. ii. p. 184), ' in many most important particulars. Among these are the time of the year, and the ground of the application for the suspension of the order. According to Philo, Petronius justified his suspension of the order by alleging that, if it was executed, the people would not collect the harvest

VOL. I.

Y

(c. 33); whereas, according to Josephus, the reason which he assigned was, that if he had enforced the order, the ground would have remained untilled (Ant. xviii. 8, 3; B. J. ii. 10, 5). For the chronological relations of these events, see Clinton, Fast. Rom. A.D. 40. It should be observed, that Philo and Josephus were not contemporary historians of this event, in the same sense of the word, for Philo was one of the Alexandrian deputation to Caligula, whereas Josephus was only two years old at the time.

Paley further alleges what he calls a very remarkable contradiction' in the accounts of the Marquis of Argyle's death, in the year 1661. All the Scotch authorities agree in declaring that the Marquis of Argyle was executed by decapitation, and that his sentence was carried into effect forty-eight hours after his trial. Full details respecting his execution have been preserved.-See Laing's Hist. of Scotland, vol. iv. p. 14-7, ed. 1819; Howell's State Trials, vol. v. p. 1370. Lord Clarendon, however, in his Life (a work written for the information of his children), says that he was condemned to be hanged upon a gallows of an unusual height, and in or near the place where he had caused the Marquis of Montrose to be formerly executed, all which was performed the same day' (vol. ii. p. 403, ed. 8vo, 1761). Burnet says: 'It was designed he should be hanged, as the Marquis of Montrose had been; but it was carried that he should be beheaded, and that his head should be set up where Lord Montrose's had been set.'-Hist. of his own Time, vol. i. p. 125; fol. 1724. Clarendon, writing about a fact which occurred at Edinburgh, and some years after the time, confounded the design with the act; and, moreover, erred as to the sentence having been executed immediately; whereas, an interval of forty-eight hours, from Saturday to Monday, was allowed. This hardly deserves to be called a very remarkable contradiction.' It is clear that Clarendon made a mistake; and, under the circumstances, the mistake was not unnatural. If Lord Clarendon had, in his history (a work written for publication), differed from other well-informed witnesses as to the material circumstances of a public event which took place in London, the expression might have been applicable. Paley refers, on this point, to the Biographia Britannica; but the first edition of this work was anterior to the publication of Clarendon's Life, and in Kippis's edition (art. Campbell, Marquis of Argyle'), the passage from the life is quoted without any remark on the discrepancy in question.

NOTE E.-(p. 312.)

THE public registers, in which the early Oriental history was recorded, were of the meagre and dry character described in the text. See Josephus cont. Apion. i. § 4-7; Voss. Ars Hist. c. 32: Winer, Bibl. R. Lex. art. Geschichte and Stammgeschlechts-register.' Ctesias wrote his history from royal chronicles, in which the Persians registered events, according to their law (Diod. ii. 32; Ctesias, ed. Baehr, p. 17); with respect to the register of the Persian king, kept by the royal scribes, see Heeren, Ideen, i. 1. p. 134-7, ed. 4; and as to the Bariλeio épnμepides concerning Alexander-Arrian, vii. 24-5. Respecting the early Hebrew chronicles, registered by contemporary scribes, see Newman's History of the Hebrew Monarchy, p. 118. The brevity and jejuneness of the Roman annals are described by Cic. De Orat. ii. 12; De Leg. i. 2. Compare Ulrici, ib. p. 87.

Speaking of the difference between the jejune style of a mere annalist and the fulness of a historian, Semp. Asellio says, in a fragment preserved in Gellius (N. 4. v. 18, § 8): Nobis non modo satis esse video, quod factum esset, id pronunciare, sed etiam quo consilio quâque ratione gesta essent demonstrare.' On the distinction between annals and history, see

a paper by Niebuhr, in his Kleine Schriften, part ii. and in the Phil. Mus. vol. ii. p. 661.

The following passage describes the process of compiling a monkish chronicle:-) :-'Statutum convenienter in Angliâ, quod unumquodque monasterium a regibus fundatum haberet de ipso loco suum certum scribam vel scriptorem, quo omnia notabilia tempore regis, saltem in regno, vel e vicinis contingentia, secundum quod veritas facti se haberet, cum datâ, annotarentur: ad proximum generale concilium, post obitum regis, omnes illi chronographi convenirent, et sua vere dicta sive scripta, in medium producerent, et delectis a concilio sagacioribus et in talibus peritis et expertis, scripta examinarent, et diligenti habitâ collatione de congestis summarium extraherent, et chronicam compingerent, ac in cœnobicis archivis librariorum, pro authenticis chronicis, quibus fides daretur, scripta reponerent, ne temporum labilitate memoriæ gestorum in regno deperirent.' Scoti Chronicon, l. xvi. c. 39.

Speaking of the period of the Heptarchy, Hume says:-The monks, who were the only annalists during those ages, lived remote from public affairs, considered the public transactions as entirely subordinate to the ecclesiastical, and, besides partaking of the ignorance and barbarity which were then universal, were strongly infected with credulity, with the love of wonder, and with a propensity to imposture: vices almost inseparable from their profession and manner of life. The history of that period abounds in names, but is extremely barren of events; or the events are related so much without circumstances and causes, that the most profound or most eloquent writer must despair of rendering them either instructive or entertaining to the reader.'-Hist. of Engl. c. 1.

Tiraboschi (Storia della Letteratura Italiana, tom. iv. lib. ii. c. 6) characterizes the Italian chronicles of the thirteenth and fourteenth centuries by saying, that they have little value either in a scientific or literary point of view; that their facts are unworthy of credit, and that their style is devoid of elegance.

On the character of the Spanish chronicles, Ticknor, Hist. of Span. Lit. vol. i. period i. ch. 8-10. The annalistic method of Guicciardini and of Zurita is pointed out by Ranke (Zur Kritik neuerer Geschichtschreiber, p. 6, 122), who remarks that Guicciardini's work is a history, not a mere collection of notices.-Ib. p. 7. Specimens of the medieval chroniclers may be seen in F. von Raumer's Handbuch merkwürdiger Stellen aus den Lateinischen Geschichtschreibern des Mittelalters (Breslau, 1813).

The ancient Mexican annals were preserved without alphabetical writing: Clumsy as it was, the Aztec picture-writing seems to have been adequate to the demands of the nation, in their imperfect state of civilization. By means of it were recorded all their laws, and even their regulations for domestic economy; their tribute-rolls, specifying the imposts of the various towns; their mythology, calendars, and rituals; their political annals, carried back to a period long before the foundation of the city. They digested a complete system of chronology, and could specify with accuracy the dates of the most important events in their history, the year being inscribed on the margin, against the particular circumstance recorded. It is true, history thus executed must necessarily be vague and fragmentary, only a few leading incidents could be presented. But in this it did not differ much from the monkish chronicles of the dark ages, which often dispose of years in a few brief sentences-quite long enough for the annals of barbarians.'-Prescott's History of the Conquest of Mexico, b. i. c. 4 (vol. i. p. 88; 8vo).

324

CHAPTER VIII.

ON CAUSATION IN POLITICS.

§ 1 IN the preceding chapters, we have attempted to explain how individual facts are observed in politics, and what

are the conditions necessary for their due observation. We have likewise shown that the collection and registration of political facts, in a connected series, is a work of such difficulty, as to require the undivided attention of one person; and that this is the function of the historian. In whatever form, however, political events may be recorded, the observation of them is made with a view of preserving them as materials to be employed in an ulterior process. This process consists in determining their

causation.

Accordingly, our attention will be devoted to an examination of the methods by which the causation of political events is ascertained. In conducting this inquiry, we shall be guided by the principles established by approved writers on the general subject of causation.(') But as there are some parts of the general subject which require a peculiar consideration in politics, it will be convenient to prefix such an introductory explanation as will serve to illustrate the problem which is proposed for our solution.

'Every fact or phenomenon which has a beginning (says Mr. Mill) invariably arises when some certain combination of positive facts exists, provided certain other positive facts do not exist.'(") Now, in speaking of the antecedents which are jointly necessary to the sequence of a given effect, we usually select one, which we denominate the cause, and to all the others we give the name

(1) See Brown's Essay on Cause and Effect; Herschel, Discourse on the Study of Nat. Phil. ch. vi.; Whewell, Phil. of the Ind. Sciences, b. iii. ch. 2-4; Mill, Logic, b. iii. ch. 5.

(2) Logic, vol. i. p. 403.