the lights of the church and the light of science-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　Lights　of　the　Church　and　the　Light　of　Science

by　Thomas　Henry　Huxley







There　are　three　ways　of　regarding　any　account　of　past

occurrences；　whether　delivered　to　us　orally　or　recorded

in　writing。



The　narrative　may　be　exactly　true。　That　is　to　say；　the　words；

taken　in　their　natural　sense；　and　interpreted　according　to　the

rules　of　grammar；　may　convey　to　the　mind　of　the　hearer；　or　of

the　reader　an　idea　precisely　correspondent　with　one　which　would

have　remained　in　the　mind　of　a　witness。　For　example；　the

statement　that　King　Charles　the　First　was　beheaded　at　Whitehall

on　the　30th　day　of　January　1649；　is　as　exactly　true　as　any

proposition　in　mathematics　or　physics；　no　one　doubts　that　any

person　of　sound　faculties；　properly　placed；　who　was　present　at

Whitehall　throughout　that　day；　and　who　used　his　eyes；　would　have

seen　the　King's　head　cut　off；　and　that　there　would　have　remained

in　his　mind　an　idea　of　that　occurrence　which　he　would　have　put

into　words　of　the　same　value　as　those　which　we　use　to

express　it。



Or　the　narrative　may　be　partly　true　and　partly　false。　Thus；　some

histories　of　the　time　tell　us　what　the　King　said；　and　what

Bishop　Juxon　said；　or　report　royalist　conspiracies　to　effect　a

rescue；　or　detail　the　motives　which　induced　the　chiefs　of　the

Commonwealth　to　resolve　that　the　King　should　die。　One　account

declares　that　the　King　knelt　at　a　high　block；　another　that　he

lay　down　with　his　neck　on　a　mere　plank。　And　there　are

contemporary　pictorial　representations　of　both　these　modes　of

procedure。　Such　narratives；　while　veracious　as　to　the　main

event；　may　and　do　exhibit　various　degrees　of　unconscious　and

conscious　misrepresentation；　suppression；　and　invention；　till

they　become　hardly　distinguishable　from　pure　fictions。

Thus；　they　present　a　transition　to　narratives　of　a　third　class；

in　which　the　fictitious　element　predominates。　Here；　again；　there

are　all　imaginable　gradations；　from　such　works　as　Defoe's　quasi…

historical　account　of　the　Plague　year；　which　probably　gives　a

truer　conception　of　that　dreadful　time　than　any　authentic

history；　through　the　historical　novel；　drama；　and　epic；　to　the

purely　phantasmal　creations　of　imaginative　genius；　such　as　the

old　〃Arabian　Nights〃　or　the　modern　〃Shaving　of　Shagpat。〃　It　is

not　strictly　needful　for　my　present　purpose　that　I　should　say

anything　about　narratives　which　are　professedly　fictitious。

Yet　it　may　be　well；　perhaps；　if　I　disclaim　any　intention　of

derogating　from　their　value；　when　I　insist　upon　the　paramount

necessity　of　recollecting　that　there　is　no　sort　of　relation

between　the　ethical；　or　the　aesthetic；　or　even　the　scientific

importance　of　such　works；　and　their　worth　as　historical

documents。　Unquestionably；　to　the　poetic　artist；　or　even　to　the

student　of　psychology；　〃Hamlet〃　and　〃Macbeth〃　may　be　better

instructors　than　all　the　books　of　a　wilderness　of　professors　of

aesthetics　or　of　moral　philosophy。　But；　as　evidence　of

occurrences　in　Denmark；　or　in　Scotland；　at　the　times　and　places

indicated；　they　are　out　of　court；　the　profoundest　admiration　for

them；　the　deepest　gratitude　for　their　influence；　are　consistent

with　the　knowledge　that；　historically　speaking；　they　are

worthless　fables；　in　which　any　foundation　of　reality　that　may

exist　is　submerged　beneath　the　imaginative　superstructure。



At　present；　however；　I　am　not　concerned　to　dwell　upon　the

importance　of　fictitious　literature　and　the　immensity　of　the

work　which　it　has　effected　in　the　education　of　the　human　race。

I　propose　to　deal　with　the　much　more　limited　inquiry：　Are　there

two　other　classes　of　consecutive　narratives　（as　distinct　from

statements　of　individual　facts）；　or　only　one？　Is　there　any　known

historical　work　which　is　throughout　exactly　true；　or　is　there

not？　In　the　case　of　the　great　majority　of　histories　the　answer

is　not　doubtful：　they　are　all　only　partially　true。　Even　those

venerable　works　which　bear　the　names　of　some　of　the　greatest　of

ancient　Greek　and　Roman　writers；　and　which　have　been　accepted　by

generation　after　generation；　down　to　modern　times；　as　stories　of

unquestionable　truth；　have　been　compelled　by　scientific

criticism；　after　a　long　battle；　to　descend　to　the　common　level；

and　to　confession　to　a　large　admixture　of　error。　I　might　fairly

take　this　for　granted；　but　it　may　be　well　that　I　should　entrench

myself　behind　the　very　apposite　words　of　a　historical　authority

who　is　certainly　not　obnoxious　to　even　a　suspicion　of

sceptical　tendencies。





Time　wasand　that　not　very　long　agowhen　all　the　relations　of

ancient　authors　concerning　the　old　world　were　received　with　a

ready　belief；　and　an　unreasoning　and　uncritical　faith　accepted

with　equal　satisfaction　the　narrative　of　the　campaigns　of　Caesar

and　of　the　doings　of　Romulus；　the　account　of　Alexander's　marches

and　of　the　conquests　of　Semiramis。　We　can　most　of　us　remember

when；　in　this　country；　the　whole　story　of　regal　Rome；　and　even

the　legend　of　the　Trojan　settlement　in　Latium；　were　seriously

placed　before　boys　as　history；　and　discoursed　of　as

unhesitatingly　and　in　as　dogmatic　a　tone　as　the　tale　of　the

Catilline　Conspiracy　or　the　Conquest　of　Britain。　。。。



But　all　this　is　now　changed。　The　last　century　has　seen　the　birth

and　growth　of　a　new　sciencethe　Science　of　Historical

Criticism。　。。。　The　whole　world　of　profane　history　has　been

revolutionised。　。。。





If　these　utterances　were　true　when　they　fell　from　the　lips　of　a

Bampton　lecturer　in　1859；　with　how　much　greater　force　do　they

appeal　to　us　now；　when　the　immense　labours　of　the　generation　now

passing　away　constitute　one　vast　illustration　of　the　power　and

fruitfulness　of　scientific　methods　of　investigation　in　history；

no　less　than　in　all　other　departments　of　knowledge。



At　the　present　time；　I　suppose；　there　is　no　one　who　doubts　that

histories　which　appertain　to　any　other　people　than　the　Jews；　and

their　spiritual　progeny　in　the　first　century；　fall　within　the

second　class　of　the　three　enumerated。　Like　Goethe's

Autobiography；　they　might　all　be　entitled　〃Wahrheit　und

Dichtung〃〃Truth　and　Fiction。〃　The　proportion　of　the　two

constituents　changes　indefinitely；　and　the　quality　of　the

fiction　varies　through　the　whole　gamut　of　unveracity。

But　〃Dichtung〃　is　always　there。　For　the　most　acute　and　learned

of　historians　cannot　remedy　the　imperfections　of　his　sources　of

information；　nor　can　the　most　impartial　wholly　escape　the

influence　of　the　〃personal　equation〃　generated　by　his

temperament　and　by　his　education。　Therefore；　from　the　narratives

of　Herodotus　to　those　set　forth　in　yesterday's　〃Times；〃　all

history　is　to　be　read　subject　to　the　warning　that　fiction　has

its　share　therein。　The　modern　vast　development　of　fugitive

literature　cannot　be　the　unmitigated　evil　that　some　do　vainly

say　it　is；　since　it　has　put　an　end　to　the　popular　delusion　of　

less　press…ridden　times；　that　what　appears　in　print　must　be

true。　We　should　rather　hope　that　some　beneficent　influence　may

create　among　the　erudite　a　like　healthy　suspicion　of　manuscripts

and　inscriptions；　however　ancient；　for　a　bulletin　may　lie；　even

though　it　be　written　in　cuneiform　characters。

Hotspur's　starling；　that　was　to　be　taught　to　speak　nothing　but

〃Mortimer〃　into　the　ears　of　King　Henry　the　Fourth；　might　be　a

useful　inmate　of　every　historian's　library；　if　〃Fiction〃　were

substituted　for　the　name　of　Harry　Percy's　friend。



But　it　was　the　chief　object　of　the　lecturer　to　the　congregation

gathered　in　St。　Mary's；　Oxford；　thirty…one　years　ago；　to　prove

to　them；　by　evidence　gathered　with　no　little　labour　and

marshalled　with　much　skill；　that　one　group　of　historical　works

was　exempt　from　the　general　rule；　and　that　the　narratives

contained　in　the　canonical　Scriptures　are　free　from　any

admixture　of　error。　With　justice　and　candour；　the　lecturer

impresses　upon　his　hearers　that　the　special　distinction　of

Christianity；　among　the　religions　of　the　world；　lies　in　its

claim　to　be　historical；　to　be　surely　founded　upon　events　which

have　happened；　exactly　as　they　are　declared　to　have　happened　in

its　sacred　books；　which　are　true；　that　is；　in　the　sense　that　the

statement　about　the　execution　of　Charles　the　First　is　true。

Further；　it　is　affirmed　that　the　New　Testament　presupposes　the

historical　exactness　of　the　Old　Testament；　that　the　points　of

contact　of　〃sacred〃　and　〃profane〃　history　are　innumerable；

and　that　the　demonstration　of　the　falsity　of　the　Hebrew　records；

especially　in　regard　to　those　narratives　which　are　assumed　to　be

true　in　the　New　Testament；　would　be　fatal　to　Christian　theology。



My　utmost　ingenuity　does　not　enable　me　to　discover　a　flaw　in　the

argument　thus　briefly　summarised。　I　am　fairly　at　a　loss　to

comprehend　how　any　one；　for　a　moment；　can　doubt　that　Christian

theology　must　stand　or　fall　with　the　historical　trustworthiness

of　the　Jewish　Scriptures。　The　very　conception　of　the　Messiah；　or

Christ；　is　inextricably　interwoven　with　J