darwin and modern science-第163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！


713　ff。　　This　article　forms　part　of　a　controversy　with　Max　Muller；　which　is　partly　concerned　with　Darwin's　views　on　language。　　He　criticises　Schleicher's　views　severely　in　his　〃Oriental　and　Linguistic　Studies〃；　page　298　ff。；　New　York；　1873。　　In　this　volume　will　be　found　criticisms　of　various　other　views　mentioned　in　this　essay。）　　More　than　most　influences　it　conduces　to　the　binding　together　of　the　elements　that　form　a　state。　　That　geographical　or　other　causes　may　effectively　counteract　the　influence　of　identity　of　language　is　obvious。　　One　need　only　read　the　history　of　ancient　Greece；　or　observe　the　existing　political　separation　of　Germany　and　Austria；　of　Great　Britain　and　the　United　States　of　America。　　But　however　analogous　to　an　organism；　language　is　not　an　organism。　　In　a　less　degree　Schleicher；　by　defining　languages　as　such；　committed　the　same　mistake　which　Bluntschli　made　regarding　the　State；　and　which　led　him　to　declare　that　the　State　is　by　nature　masculine　and　the　Church　feminine。　　（Bluntschli；　〃Theory　of　the　State〃；　page　24；　Second　English　Edition；　Oxford；　1892。）　　The　views　of　Schleicher　were　to　some　extent　injurious　to　the　proper　methods　of　linguistic　study。　　But　this　misfortune　was　much　more　than　fully　compensated　by　the　inspiration　which　his　ideas；　collected　and　modified　by　his　disciples；　had　upon　the　science。　　In　spite　of　the　difference　which　the　psychological　element　represented　by　analogy　makes　between　the　science　of　language　and　the　natural　sciences；　we　are　entitled　to　say　of　it　as　Schleicher　said　of　Darwin's　theory　of　the　origin　of　species；　〃it　depends　upon　observation；　and　is　essentially　an　attempt　at　a　history　of　development。〃

Other　questions　there　are　in　connection　with　language　and　evolution　which　require　investigationthe　survival　of　one　amongst　several　competing　words　（e。g。　why　German　keeps　only　as　a　high　poetic　word　〃ross〃；　which　is　identical　in　origin　with　the　English　work…a…day　〃horse〃；　and　replaces　it　by　〃pferd〃；　whose　congener　the　English　〃palfrey〃　is　almost　confined　to　poetry　and　romance）；　the　persistence　of　evolution　till　it　becomes　revolution　in　languages　like　English　or　Persian　which　have　practically　ceased　to　be　inflectional　languages；　and　many　other　problems。　　Into　these　Darwin　did　not　enter；　and　they　require　a　fuller　investigation　than　is　possible　within　the　limits　of　the　present　paper。


XXVII。　　DARWINISM　AND　HISTORY。

By　J。B。　BURY；　Litt。D。；　LL。D。　Regius　Professor　of　Modern　History　in　the　University　of　Cambridge。

1。　　Evolution；　and　the　principles　associated　with　the　Darwinian　theory；　could　not　fail　to　exert　a　considerable　influence　on　the　studies　connected　with　the　history　of　civilised　man。　　The　speculations　which　are　known　as　〃philosophy　of　history；〃　as　well　as　the　sciences　of　anthropology；　ethnography；　and　sociology　（sciences　which　though　they　stand　on　their　own　feet　are　for　the　historian　auxiliary）；　have　been　deeply　affected　by　these　principles。　　Historiographers；　indeed；　have　with　few　exceptions　made　little　attempt　to　apply　them；　but　the　growth　of　historical　study　in　the　nineteenth　century　has　been　determined　and　characterised　by　the　same　general　principle　which　has　underlain　the　simultaneous　developments　of　the　study　of　nature；　namely　the　GENETIC　idea。　　The　〃historical〃　conception　of　nature；　which　has　produced　the　history　of　the　solar　system；　the　story　of　the　earth；　the　genealogies　of　telluric　organisms；　and　has　revolutionised　natural　science；　belongs　to　the　same　order　of　thought　as　the　conception　of　human　history　as　a　continuous；　genetic；　causal　processa　conception　which　has　revolutionised　historical　research　and　made　it　scientific。　　Before　proceeding　to　consider　the　application　of　evolutional　principles；　it　will　be　pertinent　to　notice　the　rise　of　this　new　view。

2。　　With　the　Greeks　and　Romans　history　had　been　either　a　descriptive　record　or　had　been　written　in　practical　interests。　　The　most　eminent　of　the　ancient　historians　were　pragmatical；　that　is；　they　regarded　history　as　an　instructress　in　statesmanship；　or　in　the　art　of　war；　or　in　morals。　　Their　records　reached　back　such　a　short　way；　their　experience　was　so　brief；　that　they　never　attained　to　the　conception　of　continuous　process；　or　realised　the　significance　of　time；　and　they　never　viewed　the　history　of　human　societies　as　a　phenomenon　to　be　investigated　for　its　own　sake。　　In　the　middle　ages　there　was　still　less　chance　of　the　emergence　of　the　ideas　of　progress　and　development。　　Such　notions　were　excluded　by　the　fundamental　doctrines　of　the　dominant　religion　which　bounded　and　bound　men's　minds。　　As　the　course　of　history　was　held　to　be　determined　from　hour　to　hour　by　the　arbitrary　will　of　an　extra…cosmic　person；　there　could　be　no　self…contained　causal　development；　only　a　dispensation　imposed　from　without。　　And　as　it　was　believed　that　the　world　was　within　no　great　distance　from　the　end　of　this　dispensation；　there　was　no　motive　to　take　much　interest　in　understanding　the　temporal；　which　was　to　be　only　temporary。

The　intellectual　movements　of　the　fifteenth　and　sixteenth　centuries　prepared　the　way　for　a　new　conception；　but　it　did　not　emerge　immediately。　The　historians　of　the　Renaissance　period　simply　reverted　to　the　ancient　pragmatical　view。　　For　Machiavelli；　exactly　as　for　Thucydides　and　Polybius；　the　use　of　studying　history　was　instruction　in　the　art　of　politics。　　The　Renaissance　itself　was　the　appearance　of　a　new　culture；　different　from　anything　that　had　gone　before；　but　at　the　time　men　were　not　conscious　of　this；　they　saw　clearly　that　the　traditions　of　classical　antiquity　had　been　lost　for　a　long　period；　and　they　were　seeking　to　revive　them；　but　otherwise　they　did　not　perceive　that　the　world　had　moved；　and　that　their　own　spirit；　culture；　and　conditions　were　entirely　unlike　those　of　the　thirteenth　century。　　It　was　hardly　till　the　seventeenth　century　that　the　presence　of　a　new　age；　as　different　from　the　middle　ages　as　from　the　ages　of　Greece　and　Rome；　was　fully　realised。　　It　was　then　that　the　triple　division　of　ancient；　medieval；　and　modern　was　first　applied　to　the　history　of　western　civilisation。　　Whatever　objections　may　be　urged　against　this　division；　which　has　now　become　almost　a　category　of　thought；　it　marks　a　most　significant　advance　in　man's　view　of　his　own　past。　　He　has　become　conscious　of　the　immense　changes　in　civilisation　which　have　come　about　slowly　in　the　course　of　time；　and　history　confronts　him　with　a　new　aspect。　　He　has　to　explain　how　those　changes　have　been　produced；　how　the　transformations　were　effected。　　The　appearance　of　this　problem　was　almost　simultaneous　with　the　rise　of　rationalism；　and　the　great　historians　and　thinkers　of　the　eighteenth　century；　such　as　Montesquieu；　Voltaire；　Gibbon；　attempted　to　explain　the　movement　of　civilisation　by　purely　natural　causes。　　These　brilliant　writers　prepared　the　way　for　the　genetic　history　of　the　following　century。　　But　in　the　spirit　of　the　Aufklarung；　that　eighteenth…century　Enlightenment　to　which　they　belonged；　they　were　concerned　to　judge　all　phenomena　before　the　tribunal　of　reason；　and　the　apotheosis　of　〃reason〃　tended　to　foster　a　certain　superior　a　priori　attitude；　which　was　not　favourable　to　objective　treatment　and　was　incompatible　with　a　〃historical　sense。〃　　Moreover　the　traditions　of　pragmatical　historiography　had　by　no　means　disappeared。

3。　　In　the　first　quarter　of　the　nineteenth　century　the　meaning　of　genetic　history　was　fully　realised。　　〃Genetic〃　perhaps　is　as　good　a　word　as　can　be　found　for　the　conception　which　in　this　century　was　applied　to　so　many　branches　of　knowledge　in　the　spheres　both　of　nature　and　of　mind。　　It　does　not　commit　us　to　the　doctrine　proper　of　evolution；　nor　yet　to　any　teleological　hypothesis　such　as　is　implied　in　〃progress。〃　　For　history　it　meant　that　the　present　condition　of　the　human　race　is　simply　and　strictly　the　result　of　a　causal　series　（or　set　of　causal　series）a　continuous　succession　of　changes；　where　each　state　arises　causally　out　of　the　preceding；　and　that　the　business　of　historians　is　to　trace　this　genetic　process；　to　explain　each　change；　and　ultimately　to　grasp　the　complete　development　of　the　life　of　humanity。　　Three　influential　writers；　who　appeared　at　this　stage　and　helped　to　initiate　a　new　period　of　research；　may　specially　be　mentioned。　　Ranke　in　1824　definitely　repudiated　the　pragmatical　view　which　ascribes　to　history　the　duties　of　an　instructress；　and　with　no　less　decision　renounced　the　function；　assumed　by　the　historians　of　the　Aufklarung；　to　judge　the　past；　it　was　his　business；　he　said；　merely　to　show　how　things　really　happened。　　Niebuhr　was　already　working　in　the　same　spirit　and　did　more　than　any　other　writer　to　establish　the　principle　that　historical　transactions　must　be　related　to　the　ideas　and　conditions　of　their　age。　　Savigny　about　the　same　time　founded　the　〃historical　school〃　of　law。　　He　sought　to　show　that　law　was　not　the　creation　of　an　enlightened　will；　but　grew　out　of　custom　and　was　developed　by　a　series　of　adaptations　and　rejections；　thus　applying　the　conception　of　evolution。　　He　helped　to　diffuse　the　notion　that　all　the　institutions　of　a　society　or　a　notion　are　as　closely　interconnected　as　the　parts　of　a　living　organism。

4。　　The　conception　of　the　history　of　man　as　a　causal　development　meant　the　elevation　of　histor