the miscellaneous writings and speeches-3-第1节

按键盘上方向键 ← 或 → 可快速上下翻页，按键盘上的 Enter 键可回到本书目录页，按键盘上方向键 ↑ 可回到本页顶部！
————未阅读完？加入书签已便下次继续阅读！



The　Miscellaneous　Writings　and　Speeches…Volume　III
by　Lord　Macaulay

CONTRIBUTIONS　TO　THE　ENCYCLOPAEDIA　BRITANNICA
AND
MISCELLANEOUS　POEMS；　INSCRIPTIONS；　ETC。


CONTENTS。

CONTRIBUTIONS　TO　THE　ENCYCLOPAEDIA　BRITANNICA。
Francis　Atterbury。　　（December　1853）
John　Bunyan。　　（May　1854）
Oliver　Goldsmith。　　（February　1856）
Samuel　Johnson。　　（December　1856）
William　Pitt。　　（January　1859）

MISCELLANEOUS　POEMS；　INSCRIPTIONS；　ETC。
Epitaph　on　Henry　Martyn。　　（1812）
Lines　to　the　Memory　of　Pitt。　　（1813）
A　Radical　War　Song。　　（1820）
The　Battle　of　Moncontour。　　（1824）
The　Battle　of　Naseby；　by　Obadiah　Bind…their…kings…in…chains…and…
their…nobles…with…links…of…iron；　Serjeant　in　Ireton's　Regiment。　
（1824）
Sermon　in　a　Churchyard。　　（1825）
Translation　of　a　Poem　by　Arnault。　　（1826）
Dies　Irae。　　（1826）
The　Marriage　of　Tirzah　and　Ahirad。　　（1827）
The　Country　Clergyman's　Trip　to　Cambridge。　　An　Election　Ballad。
（1827）
Song。　　（1827）
Political　Georgics。　　（March　1828）
The　Deliverance　of　Vienna。　　（1828）
The　Last　Buccaneer。　　（1839）
Epitaph　on　a　Jacobite。　　（1845）
Lines　Written　in　August；　1847。
Translation　from　Plautus。　　（1850）
Paraphrase　of　a　Passage　in　the　Chronicle　of　the　Monk　of　St　Gall。
（1856）
Inscription　on　the　Statue　of　Lord　Wm。　Bentinck；　at　Calcutta。　
（1835）
Epitaph　on　Sir　Benjamin　Heath　Malkin；　at　Calcutta。　　（1837）
Epitaph　on　Lord　Metcalfe。　　（1847）

FRANCIS　ATTERBURY。
（December　1853。）　Francis　Atterbury；　a　man　who　holds　a　conspicuous　place　in　the　political；　ecclesiastical；　and　literary　history　of　England；　was　born　in　the　year　1662；　at　Middleton　in　Buckinghamshire；　a　parish　of　which　his　father　was　rector。　　Francis　was　educated　at　Westminster　School；　and　carried　thence　to　Christchurch　a　stock　of　learning　which；　though　really　scanty；　he　through　life　exhibited　with　such　judicious　ostentation　that　superficial　observers　believed　his　attainments　to　be　immense。　　At　Oxford；　his　parts；　his　taste；　and　his　bold；　contemptuous；　and　imperious　spirit；　soon　made　him　conspicuous。　　Here　he　published　at　twenty；　his　first　work；　a　translation　of　the　noble　poem　of　Absalom　and　Achitophel　into　Latin　verse。　　Neither　the　style　nor　the　versification　of　the　young　scholar　was　that　of　the　Augustan　age。　　In　English　composition　he　succeeded　much　better。　　In　1687　he　distinguished　himself　among　many　able　men　who　wrote　in　defence　of　the　Church　of　England；　then　persecuted　by　James　II。；　and　calumniated　by　apostates　who　had　for　lucre　quitted　her　communion。　　Among　these　apostates　none　was　more　active　or　malignant　than　Obadiah　Walker；　who　was　master　of　University　College；　and　who　had　set　up　there；　under　the　royal　patronage；　a　press　for　printing　tracts　against　the　established　religion。　　In　one　of　these　tracts；　written　apparently　by　Walker　himself；　many　aspersions　were　thrown　on　Martin　Luther。　　Atterbury　undertook　to　defend　the　great　Saxon　Reformer；　and　performed　that　task　in　a　manner　singularly　characteristic。　　Whoever　examines　his　reply　to　Walker　will　be　struck　by　the　contrast　between　the　feebleness　of　those　parts　which　are　argumentative　and　defensive；　and　the　vigour　of　those　parts　which　are　rhetorical　and　aggressive。　　The　Papists　were　so　much　galled　by　the　sarcasms　and　invectives　of　the　young　polemic　that　they　raised　a　cry　of　treason；　and　accused　him　of　having；　by　implication；　called　King　James　a　Judas。　After　the　Revolution；　Atterbury；　though　bred　in　the　doctrines　of　non…resistance　and　passive　obedience；　readily　swore　fealty　to　the　new　government。　　In　no　long　time　he　took　holy　orders。　　He　occasionally　preached　in　London　with　an　eloquence　which　raised　his　reputation；　and　soon　had　the　honour　of　being　appointed　one　of　the　royal　chaplains。　　But　he　ordinarily　resided　at　Oxford；　where　he　took　an　active　part　in　academical　business；　directed　the　classical　studies　of　the　undergraduates　of　his　college；　and　was　the　chief　adviser　and　assistant　of　Dean　Aldrich；　a　divine　now　chiefly　remembered　by　his　catches；　but　renowned　among　his　contemporaries　as　a　scholar；　a　Tory；　and　a　high…churchman。　　It　was　the　practice；　not　a　very　judicious　practice；　of　Aldrich　to　employ　the　most　promising　youths　of　his　college　in　editing　Greek　and　Latin　books。　　Among　the　studious　and　well…disposed　lads　who　were；　unfortunately　for　themselves；　induced　to　become　teachers　of　philology　when　they　should　have　been　content　to　be　learners；　was　Charles　Boyle；　son　of　the　Earl　of　Orrery；　and　nephew　of　Robert　Boyle；　the　great　experimental　philosopher。　　The　task　assigned　to　Charles　Boyle　was　to　prepare　a　new　edition　of　one　of　the　most　worthless　books　in　existence。　　It　was　a　fashion；　among　those　Greeks　and　Romans　who　cultivated　rhetoric　as　an　art；　to　compose　epistles　and　harangues　in　the　names　of　eminent　men。　　Some　of　these　counterfeits　are　fabricated　with　such　exquisite　taste　and　skill　that　it　is　the　highest　achievement　of　criticism　to　distinguish　them　from　originals。　　Others　are　so　feebly　and　rudely　executed　that　they　can　hardly　impose　on　an　intelligent　schoolboy。　　The　best　specimen　which　has　come　down　to　us　is　perhaps　the　oration　for　Marcellus；　such　an　imitation　of　Tully's　eloquence　as　Tully　would　himself　have　read　with　wonder　and　delight。　　The　worst　specimen　is　perhaps　a　collection　of　letters　purporting　to　have　been　written　by　that　Phalaris　who　governed　Agrigentum　more　than　500　years　before　the　Christian　era。　　The　evidence；　both　internal　and　external；　against　the　genuineness　of　these　letters　is　overwhelming。　　When；　in　the　fifteenth　century；　they　emerged；　in　company　with　much　that　was　far　more　valuable；　from　their　obscurity；　they　were　pronounced　spurious　by　Politian；　the　greatest　scholar　of　Italy；　and　by　Erasmus；　the　greatest　scholar　on　our　side　of　the　Alps。　　In　truth；　it　would　be　as　easy　to　persuade　an　educated　Englishman　that　one　of　Johnson's　Ramblers　was　the　work　of　William　Wallace　as　to　persuade　a　man　like　Erasmus　that　a　pedantic　exercise；　composed　in　the　trim　and　artificial　Attic　of　the　time　of　Julian；　was　a　despatch　written　by　a　crafty　and　ferocious　Dorian；　who　roasted　people　alive　many　years　before　there　existed　a　volume　of　prose　in　the　Greek　language。　　But；　though　Christchurch　could　boast　of　many　good　Latinists；　of　many　good　English　writers；　and　of　a　greater　number　of　clever　and　fashionable　men　of　the　world　than　belonged　to　any　other　academic　body；　there　was　not　then　in　the　college　a　single　man　capable　of　distinguishing　between　the　infancy　and　the　dotage　of　Greek　literature。　　So　superficial　indeed　was　the　learning　of　the　rulers　of　this　celebrated　society　that　they　were　charmed　by　an　essay　which　Sir　William　Temple　published　in　praise　of　the　ancient　writers。　　It　now　seems　strange　that　even　the　eminent　public　services；　the　deserved　popularity；　and　the　graceful　style　of　Temple　should　have　saved　so　silly　a　performance　from　universal　contempt。　　Of　the　books　which　he　most　vehemently　eulogised　his　eulogies　proved　that　he　knew　nothing。　　In　fact；　he　could　not　read　a　line　of　the　language　in　which　they　were　written。　　Among　many　other　foolish　things；　he　said　that　the　letters　of　Phalaris　were　the　oldest　letters　and　also　the　best　in　the　world。　　Whatever　Temple　wrote　attracted　notice。　　People　who　had　never　heard　of　the　Epistles　of　Phalaris　began　to　inquire　about　them。　　Aldrich；　who　knew　very　little　Greek；　took　the　word　of　Temple　who　knew　none；　and　desired　Boyle　to　prepare　a　new　edition　of　these　admirable　compositions　which；　having　long　slept　in　obscurity；　had　become　on　a　sudden　objects　of　general　interest。　The　edition　was　prepared　with　the　help　of　Atterbury；　who　was　Boyle's　tutor；　and　of　some　other　members　of　the　college。　　It　was　an　edition　such　as　might　be　expected　from　people　who　would　stoop　to　edite　such　a　book。　　The　notes　were　worthy　of　the　text；　the　Latin　version　worthy　of　the　Greek　original。　　The　volume　would　have　been　forgotten　in　a　month；　had　not　a　misunderstanding　about　a　manuscript　arisen　between　the　young　editor　and　the　greatest　scholar　that　had　appeared　in　Europe　since　the　revival　of　letters；　Richard　Bentley。　　The　manuscript　was　in　Bentley's　keeping。　　Boyle　wished　it　to　be　collated。　　A　mischief…making　bookseller　informed　him　that　Bentley　had　refused　to　lend　it；　which　was　false；　and　also　that　Bentley　had　spoken　contemptuously　of　the　letters　attributed　to　Phalaris；　and　of　the　critics　who　were　taken　in　by　such　counterfeits；　which　was　perfectly　true。　　Boyle；　much　provoked；　paid；　in　his　preface；　a　bitterly　ironical　compliment　to　Bentley's　courtesy。　　Bentley　revenged　himself　by　a　short　dissertation；　in　which　he　proved　that　the　epistles　were　spurious；　and　the　new　edition　of　them　worthless：　　but　he　treated　Boyle　personally　with　civility　as　a　young　gentleman　of　great　hopes；　whose　love　of　learning　was　highly　commendable；　and　who　deserved　to　have　had　better　instructors。　Few　things　in　literary　history　are　more　extraordinary　than　the　storm　which　this　little　dissertation　raised。　　Bentley　had　treated　Boyle　with　forbearance；　but　he　had　treated　Christchurch　with　contempt；　and　the　Christchurch…men；　wherever　dispersed；　were　as　much　attached　to　their　college　as　a　Scotchman　to　his　country；　or　a　Jesuit　to　his　order。　　Their　influence　was　great。　　They　were　dominant　at　Oxford；　powerful　in　the　Inns　of　Court　and　in　the　College　of　Physicians；　conspicuous　in　Parliament　and　in　the　literary　and　fashionable　circles　of　London。　　Their　unanimous